CORRESPONDENCE.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XL, Issue 1860, 3 August 1918, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE.

(To the Editor.) Sir. —We should he very gralrTu! if you could see your way to publish a summary of (or editorial note upon) the enclosed letter, which was the result of legal advice received, and which w.as published in the Welling!on Dominion of July l!')fli. What we wish to make plain to the publi* —and especially to (he women of -New Zealand —is the plain and indisputable fact that, although the existing law relating lo houses of ill-fame does not discriminate between the men and women who come within the scope ol its provisions, yet there is nevertheless, in effect, unjust discrimination between men and women in that men may frequent a house of ill-fame for immoral 'purposes without being guilty of an offence against,the law, while if a woman thus frequents such a house —if she visits such a house for immoral purposes even on one occasion only (even, indeed, if she visits an alleged house of illfame quite innocently on more than one occasion, as was evidenced by a recent case) —she renders herself liable to arrest upon suspicion of “assisting in the management” of such a house. We shall he extremely grateful if you will give this matter as much publicity as you deem fitting and practicable. Thanking you in anticipation, —I am etc.,

E. B. BULKLEY (Miss), Hon. Secretary, N.Z. Neo-Feminist Assn. Wellington, July 29, 1918. [Enclosure.] THE SOCIAL EVIL FROM WOMAN'S POINT OF VIEW. DO MEN AXD WOMEN RECEIVE EQUALITY OF TREATMENT? Sir. —After due deliberation, the committee of the New Zealand NeoFeminist Association has decided that the association should not allow the arguments contained in my letter on the above subject (which appeared in The Dominion of May 9th last) to lie brushed aside or ignored by the authorities who administer the War Regulations concerning houses of ill-fame. I have to ask your indulgence to allow me, by means of your columns, to make a second appeal to the public ami to our legislators to realise what results must follow from the administration of our law on this question, as it now exists.

The hnv as it now exists; Our dailies some weeks ago published a statement made by I he Minister of Justice, embodying' the opinions of the Commissioner of Police and of the Soliciioi'-tieneral, as to ’whether women and men received equalily of treatment in connection with the illicit traffic carried on in houses of ill-fame, lie stated that the effect of the War Peculations is the saint 1 as that of the statutes existing previously. We, therefore, in order to bring before your readers the exact wording of the section under consideration, give an excerpt of the relevant part of the regulations;— “The following persons shall he. guilty of offences against these regulations and shall tic liable accordingly: Every person who keeps, manages, oeetipies, or resides in a house of ill-fame, or who acts or assists in the keeping or management of any such house. Every nmh 1 prison over the age of fifteen years who lives, whether wholly or m part, on the earnings of a prostitute. Every male person man' the age of fifteen years who habitually lives or consorts with a prostitute shall he deemed to he living upon the earnings of that prosiilnle unless he, proves to (he contrary," Equality of men and women: !( is apparent that no distinction between men and women is made in the above regulations, as regards (lie offence of "keeping, managing, etc.", a house of ill-fame. Hut litis is no new principle, and in fact, before this regulation • was passed it was a mailer of common knowledge ilml a man who lived in, or assisted in the management of a brothel, was guilt v of iin offence. But when I * I, spoke of men, 1 did not consider the whole of the male sex as capable of belonging to this class of degraded criminal parasites. In other words, these regulations forbid the “keeping" of it house of ill-fame, .and nothing more than the “keeping." The men whom my association had in mind when asking that all concerned (of both sexes) in a raided house of ill-fame be punished, were the ordinary patrons or men visitors. The patrons or visitors to a theatre are never considered as “keeping or managing” the theatre at which they pay for an evening’s amusement. Xor does the paying guest at an accommodation house assist in managing the house. The man visitor: Even though a man makes periodical calls at a house of ill-fame I respectfully submit that he cannot be held to be guilty of offence against the above regulations. As the Commissioner of Police has stated, the position is analogous to that of persons found in a gaming house on the occasion of a raid —the only reason the police have in taking their names is to obtain evidence against the keeper of the house. The police in such cases have enormous difficulty in obtaining sufficient evidence to secure a conviction of the “keeper” of the illicit house. Could they ever procure sufficient evidence to convict a visitor of a criminal offence? To the best of my knowledge, the police do not in practice arrest the visitoi's in such cases. The woman visitor: The case of a woman visitor to a house of illfume is in my opinion different. In executing a warrant against such a house it seems only reasonable

that if I ho police found n woman on (ho promises, evidently (hero for immoral purposes, I hoy would assume that she* had committed the offence of “assisting: in (ho management” of the house, even though they had not seen her before, and take her info custody. The charge against her would probably be dismissed, either by a Magistrate or by a Supreme Court Judge —hut this after her being arrested and figuratively dragged into the market-place and stripped, and consefjuently doomed to life-long disgrace. Pecuniary gain; I had at firs! thought it possible that the harsh treatment of the keeper of the house of ill-fame and the immunity of the male visitor might he the result of some rule of jurisprudence to the effect that the seller of illicit pleasures is always punished on account of the pecuniary gain, while the buyer, who gives Ids money to induce another to commit a wrong against mankind, and thereby obtains personal gratification which he values more than money, or even honour, is free of guilt. In case this is the opinion of others, I would like to slate that (as I have lately ascertained) our legislature has in various cases made all concerned with a breach of the law guilty of a punishable offence, for example the law regulating the hours for the sale of intoxicating liquor; and the law which forbids both the giving and, the taking of secret commissions or “tips.” The results: It is on account of the hideous and far-reaching results of the social evil that my association has felt hound, in the interests of the State, to endeavour to impress on our legislative and administrative authorities, the results viewed from woman’s standpoint, of what is going on among us. All. will, I think, admit (halMhe prostitute is the supply created by man’s demand. Is it the employer who tempts the honest, clean typist in his office, when she is tired and lonely, to give up the drudgery of honest work and live in a flat or hotel at his expense? Or is it the young girl, fresh from her home, who offers herself body and soul for sale to her employer? Thousands of girls are being sold, or being tempted into selling themselves in the ever keen market, and we never bear of a purchaser being judicially punished. Are we to consider that our community is governed by the principle of monogamy, or does it allow polygamy? If it is wrong for a father or a husband to pay even occasional visits to houses of ill-fame, to befoul his family life, and bring dishonour'and probably disease to Ids wife and. children., is it not lime for ns as a community to apply ourselves to (he problem of devising some means of suppressing ibis criminal habit by pnnisliimr all parlies to the offence? And if the traffic is (o be allowed to continue —if men arc to bo allowed lo continue to buy women —should not the women who sacrifice themselves be registered, medically examined, and above all, be rendered immune from being spasmodically hunted and run down by (he police, to he publicly ebailed over? —T am, etc., THE 110 X. SKIC., X.Z. XEOFEMIXIST ASSOCIATION.