Part 14

To this Objection, I answer, That it is universally allow’d as one of the greatest Perfections of the Christian Religion, that its Precepts are calculated to promote the Happiness of Mankind in this World as well as the next; if so, then it is a direct Arraignment of the Lawgiver’s infinite Wisdom, _i. e._ a Contradiction to assert, that, in Matters of Law and Government, the Publick Breach of any Gospel Precept can possibly be for the temporal Good of any _Society_ whatever: And therefore we may with Confidence affirm, that no sinful Laws can be beneficial, and _vice versa_, that no beneficial Laws can be sinful. Now we have already given sufficient Proof of the Benefit the _Public_ would receive by licensing the _Stews_, and therefore ought to conclude such Licence lawful; but lest the apparent Wickedness of the _Stews_, should be objected against this general Reasoning, it is fit that we examine this Matter a little nearer.

_Fornication_ is, no doubt, a direct Breach of a _Gospel_-Precept, and is therefore a Sin; but this Sin, barely as such, concerns the _Government_ no more than the Eating of _Black-puddings_, equally prohibited in the same[8] Text. The Reason is this: The Sin consists in a full Intention to gratify a Lustful Desire; which Intention the _Legislature_ cannot possibly prevent: Penalties indeed may deter Men from gratifying their Desires, at the Expence of the Public, but will rather increase than lessen the Desires themselves. If it is argu’d, that the Sin of the Intention is aggravated by being put in Execution, so much the better for our Purpose; for then the Argument stands thus:

[8] Acts, c. 15. v. 29. _That ye abstain from Meats offered to Idols, and from Blood, and from Things strangled, and from Fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye do well. Fare ye well._

Since the Sin of the Intention is entirely out of the _Legislature_’s Power, the utmost they can do, with regard to this Sin, is, to prevent its being aggravated by actual Commission.

But the _Public Stews_, as we have already prov’d, will prevent as much as possible this actual Commission.

Therefore the _Publick Stews_ will prevent as much as possible this SIN.

Another Branch of this Objection, without which the Objection itself would be of no Force, is, that the authorizing of _Public Stews_ is a Public Encouragement for People to Whore.

If by People are meant those in the _Stews_, I hope it will be thought no Crime to encourage such People, rather to confine themselves to the Practice of one Vice, than live by committing a Thousand; especially when that one Vice is what they would really practise, whether they were encourag’d or not.

But if any imagine that this particular Licence would be a general Encouragement to the whole _Nation_, they are certainly mistaken. For, as to the Men, they are already as bad as they can be; if any Thing cures them, it must be _Satiety_: Let them have full and free Leave to take a Surfeit of unlawful Love, and they will soon learn to prefer the Chaste Embraces of Innocence before the bought Smile of Harlots loveless, joyless, unindear’d casual Fruition.

It is a right Observation, that Restraint does but whet a Man’s Passions instead of curing them.

_Exuperat magis, ægrescitque medendo._ Æn. 12. And a late ingenious _Author_, who study’d Mankind, speaking on this Subject, has these Words: _To put down_ Publick Stews, _is not only to disperse Fornication into all Parts, but, by the Difficulty, to excite wild and wanton People to this Vice._

It was observ’d at _Rome_, that in the full Liberty of Divorces, there was not a single Instance of one in fifty Years: And that _Cato_ long’d for his Wife again as soon as she was in another’s Possession.

The Master of Love says positively,

_Quod licet ingratum est, quod non licet acrius urit_.

And _Martial_ speaking to a married Rake, _B_. 3. _Ep_. 68. says,

_Cur aliena placet tibi, quæ tua non placet uxor? Nunquid Securus non potes arrigere?_

I pr’ythee tell me why a Wife Thy am’rous Fancy never warms? What! without Danger o’thy Life, Cannot thy Cod-pice stand to Arms?

And again, _B_. 1. _Ep_. 74.

_Nullus in urbe fuit tota, qui tangere vellet Uxorem gratis, Cæciliane, tuam Dum licuit: sed nunc, positis custodibus, ingens Turba fututorum est. Ingeniosus Homo es._

There’s no Man, _Cæcil_, in the Town, Would, _gratis_, have enjoy’d thy Spouse; But how thou art so jealous grown, Lord! what a Croud about the House! You’ve lock’d her up, t’increase her Value; In short, you are a cunning Fellow.

The _Public Stews_ will not encourage Men to be lewd, but they will encourage them to exercise their Lewdness in a proper Place, without disturbing the Peace of the _Society_, and with as little Detriment to themselves as possible. And, as to the Women, there’s not the least Shadow of Encouragement: For no modest Woman ever lost her Maiden-head with the dismal Prospect of becoming a _Public Courtezan_: And if a Woman is not modest, the licensing of the _Public Stews_ is no more an Encouragement for her to practise, than the allowing a certain Number of Hackney-Coaches every _Sunday_ is an Encouragement for the rest to ply; when the very Licence, to some, expresly implies a Prohibition of the rest.

Having now sufficiently proved the Institution of the _Public Stews_ to be a Political Good, and answer’d all the religious Objections against it; I shall conclude with observing, That I have the Authority of _Italy_, the most Politic Nation in the World, to back me in the first Part of my Argument; and the Opinion of _Holland_, one of the strictest Reformed Churches, to vindicate me in the second; and that we ourselves enjoy’d the Benefit of this Institution till we were depriv’d of it by the over-hasty Zeal of our first Reformers in the sixteenth Century.

The _Public Stews_ were antiently kept in _Southwark_, by an express Licence from the Government, and open Permission both Civil and Ecclesiastical, for they paid regular Taxes to the _Lord-Mayor_ of the _City_, and to the Bishop of the _See_.

We do not find that they were ever molested ’till the 25th of _Edward_ the Third, when, in the Parliament at _Westminster_, at the Request of the _Londoners_, says _Daniel_, an Act passed, obliging all Common Whores to distinguish themselves, by wearing Hoods striped with divers Colours, or Furs, and their Gowns turn’d _inside_ out.

This, indeed, was but a Trifle to what they suffer’d thirty Years after by _Wat Tyler_’s Rebellion.

In the fifth of _Richard_ the Second, _Wat_ marched up from _Dartworth_, with a true Spirit of Reformation, fully resolv’d to burn and destroy every thing that oppos’d him: If the Archbishop’s Palace at _Lambeth_ could not escape, there was little Mercy to be expected for the _Stews_[9]; besides, Whoring was not the least of _Wat_’s Grievances: He began his Rebellion by killing a Collector of the Poll-Tax for being a little too brisk upon his Daughter; and his Antipathy to the _Stews_ was still increased, by the _Lord-Mayor_’s shutting the City-Gates, and denying him Entrance; for he could not revenge the Affront more effectually, than by _cutting off so large a Branch of his Lordship’s Revenue_.

[9] On the Feast of _Corpus Christi_, or the 13th of _June_, the Commons of _Kent_ brake down the STEW-HOUSES near _London-Bridge_, at that Time in the hands of the Frowes of _Flanders_, who had farmed them of the Mayor of _London_. STOW’s Chron. p. 285.

In short, every thing concurred to the Destruction of the _Stews_, and demolish’d they were.

This Action, however, lost _Tyler_ his Life; for _William Walworth_, then Lord-Mayor, was the very Man who struck him first off his Horse in _Smithfield_: For which the King knighted him, gave him 100 _l._ Pension, and added the Dagger to the City-Arms.

Whilst Whoring was in this unsettled Condition, the _Bishop_ thought it a good Opportunity to ingross the whole Profit of licensing Courtezans, which occasion’d them fresh Trouble; for _John Northampton_, who succeeded _Walworth_, either piqued at the Bishop’s invading his Right, or out of a real Reforming Principle, for he was a Follower of _Wickliff_, commenced a severe Persecution. He had his Spies and Constables in every Street, to apprehend Strollers; and such Women as were neither handsome nor rich enough to bribe his Officers, were carried through the Streets in great Pomp, with their Hair shorn, and Trumpets and Pipes playing before them. All this he did contrary to the express Commands of the Bishop, who had several Bickerings with him upon that Head.

This great Reformer _John Northampton_ was, from his troublesome Temper, nick-nam’d _Cumber-Town_; and as he succeeded _Tyler_ in the Work of Reformation, so he had like to have met with as bad a Fate: For two Years after he was found guilty of High Treason, without making the least Defence; had his Goods confiscated, and was condemned to perpetual Imprisonment 100 Miles from _London_: Accordingly he was sent to _Tentagil-Castle_ in _Cornwall_.

This dreadful _Cumber-Town_ being removed, the _Stews_ had Leisure to re-settle themselves under the Protection of the Church; and enjoyed an almost uninterrupted Tranquillity for 150 Years.

We find, indeed, an Act passed at _Westminster_, in the 11th of _Hen._ VI. that no Keepers of _Stews_, or _Whore-Houses_ in _Southwark_, should be impannelled upon any Jury, or keep a Tavern in any other Place.

But the most sensible Blow they ever felt, was the Invasion of the _French-Pox_. The _Spaniards_ had brought it from the Islands of _Florida_ to _Naples_, and the Army of _Charles_ VIII. when he conquer’d that Kingdom in the Year 1495, transmitted it into _France_, from whence it had a very quick Passage into _England_; for there was an Act passed in the latter end of _Henry_ VII’s Reign, for expelling out of the _Stews_ all such Women as had the Faculty of _Burning_ Men.

However, we find they still continued in good Repute in the Reign of _Henry_ VIII.[10] and yielded a considerable Revenue to the _Bishop_ of _London_; for _Bucer_, in one of his Books against _Gardiner_, taxes him with it as _an heinous Crime, that he should receive most of his Rents out of the Public Stews_.

[10] In the latter end of _March_ (Anno Reg. _Hen._ VIII. 36) “the _Stewes_ on the Bank-side of the _Thames_, in _Southwark_, was put down, by the King’s Commandment, which was proclaimed by sound of Trumpets, no more to be privileged, or used as a common Bordell, but the Inhabitants of those Houses, to keep good and honest Rule, as in all other Places of the Realm. STOW’s Chron. p. 591.

After this terrible Accusation, we may easily guess what Quarter our _Stews_ met with at the Reformation. But now _Bucer_ has got his Ends; the _Stews_ are destroy’d; those public Nusances are demolish’d; Whoring is attack’d on all hands without Mercy; and what then? Why, truly, by mere Dint of _Reforming_, we have reduced Lewdness to that pass, that hardly one Bachelor in the Kingdom will lie with a Woman, if he is sure that she’s not found; and very few modest Women will suffer a Man to get them with Child, unless he makes a Promise to marry.

In short, the Truth is, we are at this present Writing as _bad_ as we can be; and I hope I have fairly shown how we may be _better_.

APPENDIX.

NUMBER I.

_RICHARD RAWLINSON_, L. L. D. and R. S. S. in his Account of _Southwark_,[11] informs us, that next to the _Bear-Garden_ on the Bank-Side was formerly the BORDELLO, or STEWES, so called from several Licensed Houses for the Entertainment of Lewd Persons, in which were Women prepared for all Comers. They were subject to several Laws and Regulations, and their Manner of Life and Privileged Places, received several Confirmations from the Crown.

[11] See _Aubrey’s_ Natural History and Antiquities of _Surrey_, _8vo._ Vol. v. p. 221.

In 1162, King _Henry_ II, in a _Parliament_ held at _Westminster_, passed an Act, confirming several Ordinances, Statutes, and old Customs observed in that Place, amongst which the following are remarkable:

* * * * *

That no _Stew-Holder_ or his Wife, should lett or stay any single Woman to go and come freely at all Times when she listed.

No _Stewholder_ to keep any Woman to board, but she to board abroad at her Pleasure.

To take no more for the Woman’s Chamber than _fourteen_ Pence.

Not to keep open his Doors upon the Holy-days.

Not to keep any single Woman in his House on the Holy-days, but the _Bailiff_ to see them voided out of the Lordship.

No single Woman to be kept against her Will, that would leave her Sin.

No _Stew-Holder_ to receive any Woman of Religion, or any Mans Wife.

No single Woman to take Money to lie with any Man, except she lye with him all Night, till the Morrow.

No Man to be drawn or enticed into any _Stew-House_.

The _Constables_, _Bailiffs_, and others, were every Week to search every _Stew-House_.

No _Stew-Holder_ to keep any Woman that hath the perillous Infirmity of _Burning_, nor to sell Bread, Ale, Flesh, Fish, Wood, Coal, or any sort of Victuals.

* * * * *

Anno 1345, Stews were licenced by King _Edward_ III. Anno 1381, these Stew-Houses belonged to _William Walworth_, Lord-Mayor of _London_, who let them out to some _Flemish_ Women, and soon after they were plundered by _Walter Tyler_, and the rebellious _Kentishmen_, when probably they were put down, and again suffered, and afterwards confirmed by _Henry_ VI. In 1506, King _Henry_ VII. for some Time shut up these Houses, which were in Number _Eighteen_, and not long after renewed their Licence, and reduced them to _Twelve_; at which Number they continued till their final Suppression by Sound of Trumpet, in 1546, by King _Henry_ VIII, whose tender Conscience startled at such scandalous and open Lewdness. The single Women who were Retainers to, or Inmates in, these Houses, were excommunicated, not suffered to enter the Church while alive, or if not reconciled before their Death, prohibited Christian Burial, and were interred in a Piece of Ground called the _Single-Women’s Church-Yard_, set a-part for their Use only. These Houses were distinguished by several Signs painted on their Fronts, as, a _Boar’s-Head_, the _Crane_, the _Cardinal’s Hat_, the _Swan_, the _Bell_, the _Castle_, the _Cross-Keys_, and the _Gun_.

NUMBER II.

_An Attempt to prove the Antiquity of the_ Venereal Disease, _long before the Discovery of the_ West-Indies; _in a Letter to Dr._ JAMES DOUGLASS, _M. D._

_SIR_,

The Undertaking I am at present engaged in, is to prove that the _Venereal Disease_ was known among us, much earlier than the _Æra_, which has been generally assign’d for its Rise by modern Authors; for it is believed it was not known, at least in _Europe_, till about the Year 1494. Notwithstanding which, I determine to make it evident, that it was frequent among us some Hundreds of Years before that Date. I could mention several Physicians and Surgeons of Eminence, who have been of the same Sentiments, particularly, the Learned Dr. _Charles Patin_, who has written a curious Dissertation to prove the _Antiquity of this Disease_, which is sufficient to excuse me from the Imputation of having started a Novelty, or being at the trouble of quoting antient Authorities before taken notice of, from the most ancient Writers of Medicine; as _Hippocrates_, _Galen_, _Avicen_, _Celsus_, &c. and even the _Holy Scriptures_. I shall therefore lay aside all those foreign Aids and Assistances, and trace out the Symptoms of the Disease, as they naturally arise, from the _first_ Infection to the _last_ destructive Period, and shew that, by searching into our own Antiquities, we may be furnished with Instances of the Frequency of the Distemper among us, in all its respective Stages, before ever our Modern Authors dream it had its Appearance in _Europe_,

I shall begin with the _first_ Degree of this Disease, and prove from authentic Evidences, it was anciently call’d the _Brenning_ or _Burning_; and that this Word has been successively continu’d for many Hundreds of Years, to signify the same Disease we now call a _Clap_; and that it was not discontinu’d till that Appellation first began to have its Rise. The most likely Method to accomplish my Design, will be first to examine those Records that relate to the _Stews_, which were by Authority allowed to be kept on the _Bank-Side_ in _Southwark_, under the Jurisdiction of the Bp. of _Winchester_, and which were suppressed the _37th_ of _Hen._ VIII. For it is impossible but, if there were any such Distemper in being at that Time, it must be pretty common among those lewd Women who had a Licence for entertaining their Paramours, notwithstanding any Rules or Orders which might be establish’d to prevent its Increase: But if we shall find that there were Orders establish’d to prevent the Spreading of such a Disease, that Persons might be secure from any contagious Malady after their Entertainment at those Houses (which were anciently 18 in Number, but in the Reign of _Hen._ VII. reduced to 12) we may then securely depend upon it, that it was the Frequency of the Disease that put those who had the Authority, under a necessity of making such Rules and Orders. For the same Powers, who granted a Liberty for keeping open such lewd Houses, must find it their Interest to secure, as much as possible, all Persons from receiving any Injury there; lest the Frequency of such Misfortunes should deter others from frequenting them, and so the original Design of their Institution cease; from the entire sinking of the Revenues. Now I find that, as early as the Year 1162, divers Constitutions relating to the Lordship of _Winchester_, (being also confirmed by the King) were to be kept for ever, according to the old Customs that had been Time out of Mind. Among which these were some, _viz._ 1. _No Stew-holder to take more for a Woman’s Chamber in the Week than 14 d._ 2. _Not to keep open his Doors upon Holy Days._ 3. _No single Woman to be kept against her Will, that would leave her Sin._ 4. _No single Woman to take Money to be with any Man, except she lie with him all Night till the Morning._ 5. _No Stew-holder to keep any Woman that hath the perilous Infirmity of Burning._ These and many more Orders were to be strictly observed, or the Offenders to be severely punished. Now we are assured, there is no other Disease that can be communicated by _Carnal-Conversation_ with Women, but that which is _Venereal_, by reason that only is contagious; and its evident the _Burning_ was certainly so: For, had it been nothing else but some simple Ulceration, Heat, or Inflammation, there would have been no Contagion; and that affecting only the Woman, could not be communicated by any _Venereal Congress_, and so not infer a Necessity of her being comprehended under the restraining Article. These Orders likewise prove the Disease was much more ancient than the Date above-mentioned; because they were only a Renewal of such as had been before established Time out of Mind.

But to confirm this farther, I find that in the Custody of the Bp. of _Winchester_, whose Palace was situate on the _Bank-side_, near the _Stews_, was a Book written upon Vellum, the Title of which runs thus: _Here begynne the Ordinances, Rules, and Customs, as well for the Salvation of Mannes Life, as for to aschew many Mischiefs and Inconvenients that daily be lik there for to fall out, to be rightfully kept, and due Execution of them to be done unto any Person within the same._ One of the Articles begins thus: _De his qui custodiunt Mulieres habentes Nephandam infirmitatem._ It goes on, _Item, That no Stew-holder keep noo Woman wythin his House, that hath any Sickness of_ BRENNING, _but that she be put out upon the peyne of makeit a fine unto the Lord of a hundred Shillings_. This is taken from the Original Manuscript, which was preserv’d in the Bishop’s Court, suppos’d to be written about the Year 1430. From these Orders we may observe the Frequency of the Distemper at that Time; which, with other Inconveniences, was _dayly like there for to fall out_: and the Greatness of the Penalty, as the Value of Money then was, that is laid on it, proves it was no trifling or insignificant thing.

But the bare Proof of there having been anciently such a Disease as was called the _Burning_, may be thought to be insufficient, unless we were perfectly assured what it was, and how it was in those Times described: I shall therefore do it from an unquestionable Authority, which is that of _John Arden_, Esq; who was one of the Surgeons to King _Richard_ II. and likewise to King _Henry_ IV. In a curious Manuscript of his upon Vellum, he defines it to be, a certain inward Heat and Excoriation of the _Urethra_; which Description gives us a perfect Idea of what we now call a _Clap_; for frequent Dissections of those who laboured under that Disease, have made it evident, that their _Urethra_ is excoriated by the Virulency of the Matter they receive from the infected Woman; and this Excoriation or Ulceration is not confined to the _Ostiola_ or Mouths of the _Glandulæ Muscosæ_ as has been lately thought, but may equally alike attack any Part of the _Urethra_ not beyond the reach of the impelled malignant Matter. The Heat before described, which these Persons are sensible of, as well now as formerly, is a Consequent of the excoriated _Urethra_; for the Salts contained in the Urine must necessarily prick and irritate the nervous _Fibrillæ_, and excite a Heat in those Parts of the _Urethra_ which are divested of its natural Membrane; which Heat will always be observed to be more or less, as the Salts are diluted with a greater or less Quantity of Urine; a thing I have often observed in Persons who have laboured under this Infirmity in hot Weather, when the perspirable Matter being thrown off in greater Quantities, the Salts bear a greater Proportion to the Quantity of Urine, and thereby make its Discharge at that Time so much the more painful and troublesome.

Thus we see this very early and plain Description of this Disease among us, to be entirely conformable to the latest and most exact Anatomical Discoveries. Here is no Tone of the _Testicles_ depraved, according to _Trajanus Petronius_; no Exulceration of the _Parastatæ_, according to _Rondeletius_; no Ulceration of the _Seminal Vessels_, according to _Platerus_; no Seat of the Disease in the _Vesiculæ Seminales_, or _Prostatæ_, according to _Bartholin_; nor in those Parts and the Testicles at the same Time, according to our Countryman _Wharton_ and others, who have falsly fixed the Seat of this Disease, and whose Notions, in this respect, are now justly exploded; but a single and true Description of it, and its Situation, about 150 Years before any of those Gentlemen obliged the World with their learned Labours.