Woman free

Part 6

Chapter 63,877 wordsPublic domain

“... milkmaids who drew milk from cows, With udders kept abnormal for that end.”

In confirmation of which see “Report of the Committee, consisting of Mr. E. Bidwell, Professor Boyd Dawkins, and others, appointed for the purpose of preparing a Report on the Herds of Wild Cattle in Chartley Park, and other parks in Great Britain.” The Committee state, concerning a herd of wild cattle at Somerford Park, near Congleton, of which herd “the cows are all regularly milked,” that “The udders of the cows here are as large as in ordinary domestic cows, which is not the case in the herds which are not milked.”—(“Report of the British Association,” 1887, p. 141.)

XXIV.

1.—“_Misread by man_ ...”

“You say ‘We marry our girls when they reach puberty,’ and you take as indication of that stage one only, and that the least certain, of the many changes which go to make up maturity. It is the least certain because the most variable, and dependent more upon climate and conditions of life than upon any true physical development. No one would deny that a strong country girl of thirteen was more mature physically than a girl of eleven brought up in the close, unwholesome atmosphere of a crowded city, yet you say the latter has attained to puberty, and that the former has not. Into such discrepancies has this physiological error led you. Without going into the domain of physiology for proof of assertion, let me draw your attention to the very practical proof of its truth, which you have in the fact well-known to you all, that girls married at this so-called period of puberty do not, as a rule, bear children till some years later, _i.e._, till they really approach maturity. I allow that you share this error with all but modern physiologists. Even if marriage is delayed till fourteen, where conception takes place immediately, sterility follows after; but where the girl is strong and healthy there is a lapse of three or four years before child-bearing begins, a proof that puberty had not been reached till then, although menstruation had been all the time existent. Of course there are exceptional cases, but does not the consensus of experience point to these as general truths?”—Mrs. Pechey Phipson, M.D. (Address to Hindoos).

_Id._ “... _sign of his misdeed_.”

See Note XXVI., 6.

4.—“... _victim to his adult rage_.”

Of this, as existent to the present age, abundant direct and collateral evidence is given by a _brochure_ entitled “A Practical View of the Age of Consent Act, for the benefit of the Mahomedan community in general, by the Committee of the Mahomedan Literary Society of Calcutta,” published by that Society, in June, 1891, as “an accurate exposition of the object and scope of the new law, in the clearest possible language, for the benefit of the Mahomedans, particularly the ignorant classes, and circulated widely in the vernacular languages for that purpose.”

The following are extracts from the pamphlet:—

Par. 1. “Now that the Age of Consent Act has been passed by his Excellency the Viceroy, in Council, and as there is every likelihood of its provisions not being sufficiently well understood by the Mahomedan community in general, and by the ignorant Mahomedans in particular, owing to the use of technical legal phraseology in the drafting of the Act, it seems to the Committee of Management of the Mahomedan Literary Society of Calcutta, to be highly desirable that the object and intention of the Government in passing this Act, as well as its scope and the manner in which it is to be administered by the Criminal Authorities, should be laid down on paper in the clearest and easiest language possible, for the information and instruction of the Mahomedan population, and particularly of such of them as are not conversant with legal technicalities.”

Par. 2. “The Committee are of opinion that such a course will be highly beneficial to members of their community, inasmuch as it will show to them distinctly what action on the part of a Mahomedan husband towards his young wife has been made, by the recent legislation, a heinous criminal offence of no less enormity than the offence of _rape_, and punishable with the same heavy punishment.”

Par. 3. “It is hoped that they will thereby be put on their guard against committing, or allowing the commission of an act which _they have hitherto been accustomed to think lawful and innocent_, but which has now been made into a heinous offence....”

Par. 9. “... There has already been a provision in the Indian Penal Code, passed more than thirty years ago, that a man having sexual intercourse with his own wife, with or without her consent, she _being under the age of ten years_, shall be considered guilty of the offence of _rape_, and shall be liable to transportation for life, or to rigorous or simple imprisonment for ten years.”

Par. 10. “From this it follows that, under the Penal Code a man having sexual intercourse with his own wife, with or without her consent, if she is _above ten_ years of age, shall not be considered to have committed the offence of _rape_. But the Act that has just been passed, in amendment of the above provision in the Penal Code, _raises_ the age of consent from _ten_ to _twelve_ years, and provides that a man having sexual intercourse with his own wife, even with her consent, shall be considered to be guilty of the offence of rape, if the wife be of any age under _twelve completed years_. This is all the change that has been made in the law.”

Par. 11. “It having been ascertained, from various sources, that in some parts of the country husbands cohabit with their wives before they have attained to the age of _twelve_ years, and even before they have arrived at _puberty_, the result of such intercourse being in many cases to cause injury to the health, and even danger to the life of the girls, and to generate internal maladies which make them miserable throughout their lives, and such a state of things having come to the notice of Government, they have considered it their duty to put a stop to it, and this is the object of the present legislation.”

Par. 12. “The law does not interfere with the age at which a girl may be married, but simply prohibits sexual intercourse with her by her husband before she is _twelve_ years of age.”

Par. 13. “It is therefore _incumbent_ upon all husbands and their guardians (if they are very young and inexperienced lads) to be very careful that sexual intercourse does not take place until the girl-wife has _passed_ the age of _twelve_ years. It will also be the duty of the guardians of the girl-wife not to allow her husband to cohabit with her until she has attained that age.”

Par. 17. “... The Mahomedan law (_i.e._, religious law) distinctly sanctions consummation of marriage _only_ when the wife has reached puberty, and has besides attained such physical development as renders her fit for sexual intercourse, and it is _not imperative_ upon a Mahomedan husband to consummate marriage with his wife when she is _under_ the age of _twelve_ years. Even in those rare cases in which the wife attains to puberty and the necessary physical development before the age of _twelve_, a Mahomedan husband _may_, without infringing any canon of the Mahommedan Ecclesiastical Law, _abstain_ from consummating his marriage with her _until_ she attains that age.

Par. 18. “The above will clearly show that the Act recently passed by the Legislature does not, in any way, interfere with the Mahomedan religion, and _no_ Mahomedan husband will be considered to have committed a sin if he abstains from consummating marriage with his wife _before_ she is _twelve_ years of age.”

(The pamphlet is published, as aforesaid, by the Mahomedan Literary Society of Calcutta, of which the patron is the Hon. Sir Charles A. Elliott, K.C.S.I., C.I.E., and the president Prince Mirza Jahan Kadar Bahadur (of the Oudh family), and is signed by the secretary, Nawab Abdool Luteef Bahadur, C.I.E.; Calcutta, 16 Taltollah, 22nd June, 1891.)

The italics, as above, exist in the original (with the exception of those in Par. 3), and serve, singularly enough, to point for us a moral very much deeper than that intended. It is a happy fact that British feeling, supported by the growing sentiment of the more intelligent and educated of the native population, has effected even so slight an amelioration of law and custom, and we may hope for and press forward to further improvement. Though the utterance quoted above is only that of the Mahomedan section, it is, of course, understood that the law does not apply or point to them alone, but to all the peoples and sects of India; and that the approval of this legislation is also general among the enlightened of those other creeds. (See end of Note XVII., 8.)

Singular confirmatory evidence as to the distressing prevalence of this child-marriage is incidentally given in the following paragraph from the _Times_ of 31st March, 1892:—

“A correspondent of the _Times of India_ mentions some odd instances of minor difficulties which have occurred in the working of the amended Factory Act, which came into force in India at the commencement of the present year. The limit of age for ‘full-timers’ in factories is fixed at fourteen years, and as very few native operatives know their children’s ages, or even their own, the medical officer has, in passing lads and girls for work, to judge the age as best he can—generally, as in the case of horses, by examining their teeth. If he concludes that they are under fourteen, he reduces them to ‘half-timers.’ In one Bombay mill recently a number of girls were thus sent back as under age who were actually mothers, and several boys who were fathers were also reduced; and one of the latter was the father, it is said, of three children. The case of these lads is particularly hard, for, with a wife and child, or perhaps children, to support, life, on the pay of a ‘half-timer,’ must be a terrible struggle.”

Lest it should be objected that such abuses—with their consequences—as have been instanced in India, are peculiar to that country or civilisation, and that their discussion has therefore no bearing on our practices in England, and the physical consequences ensuant here, it will be salutary to recall what has been our own national conduct in this matter of enforcement of immature physical relations on girl children or “wives” within times of by no means distant date. Blackstone tells in his “Commentaries,” Book II., Chap. VIII., that “The wife must be above nine years old at her husband’s death, otherwise she shall not be endowed, though in Bracton’s time the age was indefinite, and dower was then only due ‘si uxor possit dotem promereri, _et virum sustinere_.’” Whereupon Ed. Christian makes the following note, worthy of the most careful meditation:—“Lord Coke informs us that ‘if the wife be past the age of nine years at the time of her husband’s death, she shall be endowed, of what age soever her husband be, albeit he were but _four_ years old. Quia junior non potest dotem promereri, _et virum sustinere_.’ (Coke on Litt., 33.) This we are told by that grave and reverend judge without any remark of surprise or reprobation. But it confirms the observation of Montesquieu in the ‘Spirit of Laws,’ Book XXVI., Chap. III. ‘There has been,’ says he, ‘much talk of a law in England which permitted girls seven years old to choose a husband. This law was shocking two ways; it had no regard to the time when Nature gives maturity to the understanding, nor to the time when she gives maturity to the body.’ It is abundantly clear, both from our law and history, that formerly such early marriages were contracted as in the present times are neither attempted nor thought of.

“This was probably owing to the right which the lord possessed of putting up to sale the marriage of his infant tenant. He no doubt took the first opportunity of prostituting (_i.e._, selling in marriage) the infant to his own interest, without any regard to age or inclinations. And thus what was so frequently practised and permitted by the law would cease even in other instances to be considered with abhorrence. _If the marriage of a female was delayed till she was sixteen, this benefit was entirely lost to the lord her guardian._

“Even the 18 Eliz., cap. 7, which makes it a capital crime to abuse a consenting female child under the age of ten years, seems to leave an exception for these marriages by declaring only the _carnal and unlawful_ knowledge of such woman-child to be a felony. Hence the abolition of the feudal wardships and marriage at the Restoration may perhaps have contributed not less to the improvement of the morals than of the liberty of the people.”—(Blackstone’s Comm., Christian’s Edition, 1830, Vol. II., p. 131.)

6.—“... _manner_ ...”

“Manner,” or “custom” is the early Biblical definition for this habit (_vide_ Gen. xviii. 11, and xxxi. 35). It may be noticed that the word is not rendered or translated as “nature.” It is also called “sickness” (Lev. xx. 18); and “pollution” (Ezek. xxii. 10). See also Note XXV. 8.

The authorised version of the Bible is here referred to. The euphemisms attempted in the recent revised version as amendments of some of these passages are equally consonant with the argument of this note.

XXV.

1.—“_Vicarious punishment_ ...”

Revolting was the shock to the writer, coming, some years ago, with unprejudiced and ingenuous mind, to the study of the so-called “Diseases of Women,” on finding that nearly the whole of these special “diseases,” including menstruation, were due, directly or collaterally, to one form or other of _masculine_ excess or abuse. Here is a nearly coincident opinion, afterwards met with:—“The diseases peculiar to women are so many, of so frequent occurrence, and of such severity, that half the time of the medical profession is devoted to their care, and more than half its revenues depend upon them. We have libraries of books upon them, special professorships in our medical colleges, and hosts of doctors who give them their exclusive attention.... The books and professors are all at fault. They have no knowledge of the causes or nature of these diseases” (or at least they do not publish it, or act on it), “and no idea of their proper treatment. Women are everywhere outraged and abused. When the full chapter of woman’s wrongs and sufferings is written, the world will be horrified at the hideous spectacle....”—T. L. Nichols, M.D. (“Esoteric Anthropology,” p. 198).

So, again, in speaking of menorrhagia:—“The causes of this disease, whatever they are, must be removed. Thousands of women are consigned to premature graves; some by the morbid excesses of their own passions, but far more by the sensual and selfish indulgences of those who claim the legal right to murder them in this manner, whom no law of homicide can reach, and upon whose victims no coroner holds an inquest.”—(_Op. cit._, p. 301.)

2.—“... _grievous toll_ ...”

And this in every grade of society, even to the pecuniary loss, as well as discomfort, of the labouring classes of women.

“Statistics of sickness in the Post Office show that women” (these are unmarried women) “are away from their work more days than men.”—(Sidney Webb, at British Association, 1891.)

5.—“... _no honest claim_.”

The _Times_ of Aug. 3, 1892, reports a paper by Professor Lombroso, of Turin (at the International Congress of Psychology, London), in which occurs the following:—“It must be observed that woman was exposed to more pains than man, because man imposed submission and often even slavery upon her. As a girl, she had to undergo the tyranny of her brothers, and the cruel preferences accorded by parents to their male children. Woman was the slave of her husband, and still more of social prejudices.... Let them not forget the physical disadvantage under which she had to labour. She might justly call herself the pariah of the human family.”

The word is apt and corroborative, for it was no honest act—it was not Nature, but human cruelty and injustice that formed a pariah.

8.—“... _opprobrious theme_.”

_Conf._ ancient and mediæval superstitions and accusations on the subject. Raciborski notes these aspersions (Traité, p. 13):—“Pline prétendait que les femmes étant au moment des règles pouvaient dessécher les arbres par de simples attouchements, faire périr des fruits, &c., &c.” And a further writer says more fully:—“Pliny informs us that the presence of a menstrual woman turns wine sour, causes trees to shed their fruit, parches up their young fruit, and makes them for ever barren, dims the splendour of mirrors and the polish of ivory, turns the edge of sharpened iron, converts brass into rust, and is the cause of canine rabies. In Isaiah xxx. 22, the writer speaks of the defilement of graven images, which shall be cast away as a menstruous cloth; and in Ezekiel xviii. 6, and xxxvi. 17, allusions of the same import are made.” Unless we accept the antiquated notion of a “special curse” on women, how reconcile the idea of an “ordinance of Nature” being so repulsively and opprobriously alluded to? Well may it be said:—“Ingratitude is a hateful vice. Not only the defects, but even the illnesses which have their source in the excessive” (man-caused) “susceptibility of woman, are often made by men an endless subject of false accusations and pitiless reproaches.”—(M. le Docteur Cerise, in his Introduction to Roussel, p. 34.)

XXVI.

1.—“_Thoughts like to these are breathings of the truth_.”

“I submit that there is a spiritual, a poetic, and, for aught we know, a spontaneous and uncaused element in the human mind, which ever and anon suddenly, and without warning, gives us a glimpse and a forecast of the future, and urges us to seize truth, as it were, by anticipation. In attacking the fortress we may sometimes storm the citadel without stopping to sap the outworks. That great discoveries have been made in this way the history of our knowledge decisively proves.”—H. T. Buckle (“Influence of Women on the Progress of Knowledge”).

_Id._... “Then there is the inner consciousness—the psyche—that has never yet been brought to bear upon life and its questions. Besides which, there is a supersensuous reason. Observation is perhaps more powerful an organon than either experiment or empiricism. If the eye is always watching, and the mind on the alert, ultimately chance supplies the solution.”—Jefferies (“The Story of My Heart,” Chap. X.).

_Id._... “Women only want hints, finger-boards, and finding these, will follow them to Nature. The quick-glancing intellect will gather up, as it moves over the ground, the almost invisible ends and threads of thought, so that a single volume may convey to the mind of woman truths which man would require to have elaborated in four or six.”—Eliza W. Farnham (“Woman and Her Era,” Vol. II., p. 420).

3.—“... _futile mannish pleas_ ...”

Roussel details fully some nine of these main theories or explanations of the habitude. (“Système,” Note A.)

6.—“_In blindness born_ ...”

“Tous ces faits nous induisent fortement à conjecturer qu’il a dû exister un temps ou les femmes n’étaient point assujettiés à ce tribut incommode; que le flux menstruel bien loin d’être une institution naturelle, est au contraire un besoin factice contracté dans l’état sociale.”—Roussel (_Op. cit._, Chap. II.).

Note that menstruation (scriptural “sickness”) remains a pathological incident, not, as child-birth, an indubitably natural and normal physical function.

See also Note XXX., 4.

_Id._—“... _in error fostered_ ...”

Not only the habit itself, but its causes. And this by medical, _i.e._, assumedly curative, practitioners. As to which “fostering,” medical and clinical manuals afford abundant spontaneous and ingenuous testimony, and also of other professional practices of instigation, or condonation, or complicity, at which a future age will look aghast. _Conf._ the following from Whitehead, “On the Causes and Treatment of Abortion and Sterility” (Churchill, 1847):—

“In a case under my care of pregnancy in a woman, with _extreme deformity of the pelvis_, wherein it was considered advisable to _procure abortion_ in the fifth month of the process, the ergot alone was employed, and, at first, with the desired effect.” [The italics are not in the doctor’s book; he remarks nothing wrong or immoral, and—in an unprofessional person—illegal, and open to severest penalty; he is simply detailing the effects of a specified medicament.] “It was given in _three successive_ pregnancies, and in each instance labour pains came on after eight or ten doses had been administered, and expulsion was effected by the end of the third day. It was perseveringly tried in a fourth pregnancy in the same individual, and failed completely” (p. 254).

There is an ominous silence as to whether the patient’s health or life also “failed completely.”

See further a case noted on p. 264, _op. cit._:—

1st child, still-born, in eighth month, April 1832. 2nd child, abortion at end of 6th month. 3rd child, abortion at end of 6th month. 4th child, abortion at end of 5th month. 5th child, abortion soon after quickening, Summer, 1838. 6th child, still-born, 7th October, 1839. 7th child, no clear record given.

Also other somewhat parallel cases given, the constant incidental accompaniment being painful physical suffering and grave inconvenience, frequently with fatal results. Medical records are full of similar histories. To the unsophisticated mind, two questions sternly suggest themselves: Firstly, Is it meet or right for an honourable profession, or any individual member of it, to be _particeps criminis_ in such proceedings as the above? and, secondly, is the indicated connubial morality on any higher level, or likely to be attended with any better consequences, than the prior ignorant or savage abuses which are responsible for woman’s present physical condition?

The advocacy of cardinal reform in this direction—in the wrong done both to the individual and the race—is urgent part of the duty of our newly-taught medical women. Nor are their eyes closed nor their mouths dumb in the matter. Dr. Caroline B. Winslow is quoted by the _Woman’s Journal_ of Boston, U.S., 16th Jan., 1892, as saying in an article on “The Right to be Well Born”: “What higher motive can a man have in life than to labour steadily to prepare the way for the coming of a higher, better humanity?... Dense ignorance prevails in our profession, and is reflected by laymen. All their scientific studies and years of medical practice have failed to convict men of the wrongs and outrages done to women; wrongs that no divine laws sanction, and no legal enactments can avert....

“The physician is a witness of the modern death-struggles and horrors of maternity; he sees lives pass out of his sight; he makes vain attempts to restore broken constitutions, broken by violating divine laws that govern organic matter: laws that are obeyed by all animal instinct; yet all this knowledge, observation, and experience have failed to reveal to the benighted intellect and obtuse moral sense of the ordinary practitioner this great wrong. He makes no note of the unhallowed abuse that only man dares; neither will he mark the disastrous and deteriorating effect of this waste of vital force on his own offspring. The mental, moral, and physical imperfections of the rising generation are largely the result of outraged motherhood.”

7.—“_The spurious function growing_ ...”