"neither the Government nor its officers, either directly or indirectly, encourage prostitution: no act of theirs can justly be taken as encouraging vice."
If ordering a number of prostitutes for the use of the soldiers, providing them with free quarters, paying their cost of transit from place to place, voting them money from cantonment funds, paying a procuress to collect and organise them, is not encouraging vice, words have lost their meaning and we have before us an example of the extraordinary power of self-deception possessed by the human mind.
It may be said by some of you, "After all, this was a long time ago." It is true these things happened in 1886, eleven years ago.
But it takes much more than eleven years to root out the results of so much wrong-doing. But if you want it I can bring before you evidence of what happened much more recently than in 1886. Between 1886 and 1893 two American lady missionaries, Mrs. Andrews and Dr. Kate Bushnell, reported what they had seen going on in ten stations in India, viz., the prostitutes' quarters provided at Government expense in close proximity to those of the soldiers; the paid procuress at their head; the expense of their transit defrayed from public funds, and so forth. These reports were published in several of the religious papers at home, and much indignation was expressed. Lord Roberts, who had just returned from India, where he had been Commander-in-Chief, was questioned by an interviewer as to the accuracy of statements made by the lady missionaries, and he said that they were "simply untrue." A considerable amount of public excitement still continued to find expression, and the result was that in 1893 the Government appointed a small departmental committee to enquire into the truth of the allegations. The report of this committee entirely confirmed the accuracy of the statements that had been made. Lord Roberts himself acknowledged that they were "in the main correct," and apologised to the ladies for his former assertion. It is quite true that the departmental committee was not unanimous. There was a minority report; but this minority report acknowledges the "sincerity and intelligence" of the lady missionaries, so that the accuracy of their evidence was in the end fully established.
Page II
This brings us to 1893; and if you want more recent evidence still that the spirit we are warring with is not extinct in India, I would refer you to an article which appeared in the Allahabad Morning Post on August 26th, 1896, little more than a year ago, urging that a sort of philanthropical society should be formed for the purpose of starting disorderly houses in every cantonment, where vice could be practised without risk to health.
"If money were available," says the article, "there would be little difficulty in getting responsible people to support and conduct well-managed establishments in every cantonment, and we cannot see how this would infringe any enactment on the subject. The fanatics, of course, would shriek; but are their shriekings at all worth considering?"
The reason why I have brought all these things before you, is to make you realise the real character of the fight that has been going on for the last twenty-five years, and what we are now struggling against. I do not take any credit for the ground that has been gained. Others have borne the burden and heat of the day, and I have been for the most part only a spectator, though a deeply interested spectator, of the fight. But the real force at the back of this movement is the desire, openly expressed by many of our opponents, to re-enact the Contagious Diseases Acts both in England and India. That is the reason why, in the words of the resolution, we view with alarm the new rules which have been introduced, and I think every candid person must admit that the evidence I have laid before you of
Page 139