If we recall the causes which force women into the sewer of prostitution,—if we remember the humiliations of registered and non-registered girls,—we shall not be at all astonished that common prostitutes often feel all the horror of their lot, and we shall understand the talent of observation presented by certain types rendered familiar by literature.
Apart from romance and the drama, the authors who have, at Paris, studied this subject with such scrupulous accuracy, declare to us in like manner, that a great number of these “unfortunates” are conscious of their degradation, and hasten to quit their infamous means of living when they find normal means of livelihood. Unhappily this recovery is but an exceptional fact; the brothel-keeper, who collects the proceeds of their sale, makes them giddy by intoxication to dissemble from them the horror of their degradation. Their mirthfulness is often but a mere external display, provoked by the impure jokes of those who support them. Among those confined in the St. Lazare, too, are found instincts of shame, united to the sentiments of motherly love. Most of them impose heavy sacrifices upon themselves to bring up their child, the only creature, say they, who will not at all despise them.
A few words of sympathy astonish them. A young female foundling, whom want had caused to take to bad ways, was admitted into the “Bon Pasteur” institution: the fulness of her joy made her shed tears abundantly, because it was the first time, she said, that any one had spoken kindly to her. The horror of this condition has many a time been the cause of mental aberration and suicide.[12] The consciousness of their degraded condition has been apparent even in the queens of fashion who have become famous in backstairs society. Théroigne de Méricourt one day recognised, in Paris, the gentleman who had deceived her; she darted so vindictive a look at him that he perceived how dangerous his position was becoming, at a time when the lower orders were exercising such an implacable justice against crimes unpunished till then, and he dared to ask forgiveness of her. “My forgiveness!” she replied, “and with what price could you pay for it? My innocence betrayed, my honour lost, that of my family sullied, my brothers and sisters pursued in their native place by the sarcasms of their neighbours; my father’s curse; my exile from my native land; my enrolment in the infamous caste of courtesans; the blood with which I stain and shall stain my hands; my memory execrated among men; that immortality of virtue which you have taught me to doubt—this is what you wish to redeem! Let us see: do you know a price on earth able to pay me for all that?”[13] Théroigne not believing that the guilty man’s blood was too precious or too pure to wipe out her shame, allowed, or caused, him to perish in the September massacres.[14]
At periods of religious revival especially, the courtesan has a consciousness of her debasement. Under the influence of gospel enlightenment the most abandoned women were reformed to the length of hastening to martyrdom, in order to wipe out the stains of their life in this baptism of blood. When the age of persecution was past, the church tried to reinstate fallen women; councils granted a dispensation from canonical penance to those who gave up their evil ways, and granted forgiveness of their sins to the men who should marry them.[15] Different societies were formed with the design of raising a dower for them. The middle age opened numerous asylums to them: St. Louis had a large refuge built for them, and gave them the name of “Filles-Dieu.”—“And caused,” says Joinville, “a great number of women to be put in a refuge, who from poverty were made to sin by the luxurious, and gave them 400 livres annually to live upon.” This dotation (endowment), enormous for the age, was higher than that of the “Quinze-Vingts,” which received only 300 livres.[16][17] Louis IX. also helped them with his advice, or founded with his money several similar institutions, as places affiliated to the “Filles-Dieu.” “The King,” says Joinville further, “caused houses of nuns to be instituted in several places of his kingdom, and gave them incomes to live upon, and recommended that they should be admitted into them who were willing to resolve (fere contenance) to live in chastity.”
The Duke of Orleans, afterwards Louis XII., collected in a part of his “hotel” two hundred penitent girls, whom destitution and licentiousness had perverted during war; but France was then so ruined, and existence was so rough for modest women, that several of them became prostitutes with the design of getting admission. The Corporation of Paris also supplied penitent women with money-aids, which are found entered thus in a bill of the 16th century:—“To poor penitent girls, six livres parisis for charity and alms, to get bread, of which they stand in great need.”
Louis XIV. founded the Madeleine asylum; he granted his patronage to that of the Bon Pasteur, which a widow founded, and to Sainte Pélagie, the work of Madame de Miramion. Paris built, in the 18th century, four more establishments of this kind, under the titles of the Saviour, St. Valerius, St. Theodore, and St. Michael. These refuges, so richly endowed by royal or private munificence, had numerous subsidiary institutions in the provinces; the letters-patent of our Kings, even the bulls of the Popes, gave authority for making them permanent.
Other societies reinstated fallen women by affiancing them to Christ.
After the revolution had destroyed these rich and numerous places of refuge, the Consulate re-established the house of St. Michael; the City of Paris and the Ministry for charitable institutions also founded that of the Bon Pasteur in 1821; but the inadequacy of the sums placed at their disposal did not admit of these institutions fulfilling their original purpose. There was the same poverty of resources in all France. This state of things seemed deplorable, whether it be regarded in reference to the wealth of the spoliated refuges, or be compared with the stability and the opulence of those other social institutions that are called toleration-houses, and to the sums absorbed in the interest of profligacy upon the pretext of public health and security. An effect of our moral impoverishment, and of certain economical doctrines which have gone to the extent of making the refuges guilty of the progress of prostitution, may be seen in that. Without doubt, there is immorality in the efforts made to take away from vice the consequences which nature has attached to it; but this consideration can only be applied to individuals who choose it voluntarily. In going back to the causes of the downfall of the greater number of women, we can but bless the hand which tries to raise them up, though tardily. Every measure which relates to them is, however, but a powerless palliative of an evil which must be attacked in its causes, by putting down the profligacy of the man.