How did Mary conduct her "transactions?"

[JTRSickert]

Hello all,

Something just occured to me. Mary Kelly was living at 31 Miller's Court for a few years. Now, we know that Joseph Barnett was angry because Mary was bringing back fellow prostitutes to sleep in the room, which caused him to move out.

What I was wondering was: when Mary went out to prostitute herself, do you think she did as the other prostitutes did, take her client to a secluded area and commit the trasnaction outdoors, or take them back to her flat (both before, during, and after Barnett was living with her)?

Also, I have always wondered if someone misquoted Barnett about him leaving Mary for bringing other prostitutes to stay with her? I always have considered that what barnett really said was when Mary went out prostituting herself, she was bringing back her clients to the room and this, naturally, made Barnett angry.

Any thoughts?

[GUT]

G'Day JTR

What I was wondering was: when Mary went out to prostitute herself, do you think she did as the other prostitutes did, take her client to a secluded area and commit the trasnaction outdoors, or take them back to her flat (both before, during, and after Barnett was living with her)?

1. She probably wasn't on the game when Joe was earning, that's based on his evidence.

2. When she was it probably depended on what they could afford, f it was a 6p or less I doubt she would have taken them back to her room and risked not being able to get rid of them

Also, I have always wondered if someone misquoted Barnett about him leaving Mary for bringing other prostitutes to stay with her? I always have considered that what barnett really said was when Mary went out prostituting herself, she was bringing back her clients to the room and this, naturally, made Barnett angry.

What of the evidence of Maria and Julia then?

[markmorey5]

I have written a novel which takes in more of life in nineteenth century Britain than the Whitechapel Murders, although Mary Kelly does feature in my story. My hypothesis was that Barnett lost his job and she resorted to working on the streets to make ends meet, before taking Maria Harvey into her room for a few days. Barnett leaves and that allows Mary Kelly to take men to her room, as we already know from her movements on that last night. From what I could find out the going rate was thruppence for an older woman to sixpence for someone younger and attractive like Kelly, so Hutchinson's statement of Mary asking for a loan of sixpence is more likely Mary asking Hutchinson for sixpence for something else.

At the time prostitution was not illegal but living off the earnings was, and Barnett would have been wary of admitting too much in his statements to journalists and at the coronial enquiry for fear of incriminating himself. Probably Hutchinson didn't want to be publicised as a client or potiential client of a prostitute.

[GUT]

G'Day Mark

My research says that the 6p would have been for a knee trembler up a dark alley, more for a bed.

Just think a bed for the night in a doss house 4p for a bed with a 26 or 28 year old for the night maybe as high as 1s.

[markmorey5]

GUT,
I wasn't sure about the cost but from what I could find out, sixpence was the rate for a knee trembler and less for an older woman. I thought it would cost more in a bed such as 13 Millers Court, but George Hutchinson's statement about Mary Kelly asking for sixpence made me think otherwise. Maybe Mary Kelly was selling herself short, but like many things in her life we will never know.

A prostitute for the night in a lodging house sharing a double bed ought to cost more than sixpence, given it was for the night. Mary's room was for as long as it took, so that was a different scenario.

I did find out it was tuppence for a drink at the hotel, and a working woman would earn about 1 and 6 for a 10-hour shift in a factory.

[GUT]

G'Day Mark

I'll try and find the source I think it was in one of my wife's history books may "Damn Whores and God's Police" I'm really not sure. But I do recall reading 1s for "a night" was the gong rate.

[miss marple]

It is worth mentioning the famous Criminal Amendment Act of 1885 which rendered all aspects of prostitution illegal. Under the act procuring and brothel keeping were illegal.Brothel owners and agents could be fined £20 or three months hard labour for a first offence and £40 and four months for subsequent offences. Procuring young girls for prostitution and attempting to introduce them into a brothel had severe penalties.
This had the effect of criminalising brothel keepers and bawds for the first time. Many brothels in the West End had to close down or operate under cover. There were famous rooms, cafes, divans, smoking rooms that operated as brothels openly in the West End, Haymarket and Windmill St
After this time brothels became more private.
So even in the East End no one would openly operate a brothel. The street girls would have to be fairly discreet.There were not flaunting themselves. The ripper victims were in a sense, amateurs, poor women who who needed a few pennies now and again, while also seeming to have other sources of income either through shacking up with a man or doing a bit of cleaning. Very few women would described themselves as prostitutes unless arrested and fined. Mary only went back to it when Joe lost his job and could no longer support her.
The fourpence or drinks they earned was barely worth the trouble, not the rate a West End whore would expect, anything from five bob to ten shillings. Some girls made a good living and retired on their earnings and married respectably. Others of course had terrible lives.

The mystery of Mary Kelly is that had she been in a West End Brothel and to France, that how she sank so low to end up in Whitechapel slum.
Drink may have been one reason, or stroppiness.[ taking Mrs Buki to knightsbridge to claim back some fancy dresses] perhaps she valued her independence, did not like being dictated to and preferred to take her chances in the east end.

Miss Marple

[GUT]

G'Day Miss Marple

But prostitution itself was still legal.

[markmorey5]

The Criminal Law Amendment Act and the Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon feature in my forthcoming novel. The act raised the age of consent to 16 and introduced heavier penalties for procurement, and both amendments were well overdue. The legal situation prior to 1885 was that living off the earnings was illegal and remained so, which meant brothels were illegal. However brothels existed as they do now, primarily through the police showing a disinterest. It appears that Mary McCarthy (real name) ran a brothel at One Breezers Hill. Soliciting was a crime and had been for a while.

The most infamous brothel was Cleveland Street, but police interest there came about through homosexuality being available, which was a step too far.

Our stereotype of the Victorians is one of sexual prudery, and there was no doubt they were prudish about the language of sex. However prudishness about sex itself wasn't necessarily true, and they did enjoy sex lives that are at odds with the stereotype. Sexual moderation was recommended, being twice a week for couples which isn't really that moderate. Barrier methods of birth control but typically not condoms became widespread in useage. Manuals were made available not only about birth control but also about sexual pleasure. Many Victorians were pregnant when married and many lived together unmarried. The pregnant when married was more a case of sexual intimacy after engagement.

Some of the Victorian, sexual stereotypes such as women are disinterested with sex come from one or two written sources quoted out of context. However, you don't have to look very hard to find many written sources to the contrary.

The immediate aftermath of the Criminal Law Amendment act saw The Salvation Army and other groups use the momentum of the pressure involved in getting that act passed to press for other, moral changes. Artworks and literature were censored, birth control pamphlets and marriage manuals were censored and we start to see the beginnings of true, sexual prudery which then continued through to the 1960s. Josephine Butler distanced herself from this campaign while complaining that it was ridiculous to compel individuals to be moral by force. The demonstrations leading to the passing of the act in 1885 were substantial, bordering on riots, and this seemed to spook the Commons into action in areas that were well beyond preventing 13 year from olds working in brothels.

So the dim, dark era of sexual ignorance that characterised my parent's generation seems to commence in 1885, given that laws passed in England would apply to Australian colonies in due course. None of my discussion on Victorians and sex applies to Americans of that era who I don't know much about, but who seemed to have a different take on things. They too had child prostiution but beyond that I don't know anything about American sexual morals and values in the Victorian era. However it does seem that the late 19th Century there saw a similar move towards true, sexual prudery, and probably from the same forces as in Britain at the time.

[GUT]

G'Day markmorey5

I haven't had cause to look at the act for some time, but my recollection is that procurement, brothels and living off the earnings of a prostitute was illegal but prostitution itself was not.

[GUT]

I've always wondered at the offense of "living off the earning of prostitution" what was she supposed to do with what she earned.

[markmorey5]

Procurement and living off the earnings were illegal for quite some time, but in the case of procurement the punishment was pitiful, so these penalties were substantially increased in the criminal law amendment act of 1885. The Maiden Tribute gave the impression that hundreds and perhaps thousands of 13 to 16 year olds were groomed to be defiled but such numbers were creative journalism. Nonetheless the kidnapping, sale or trickery (often through offering domestic service jobs to 13 year olds only to end up in brothels) was vile and abhorent.

Living off the earnings related to third parties so the offence automatically made any brothel illegal by default, which explains the relative high proportion of street workers in Britain at the time, at least compared to European countries and especially France which had regulated, legalised brothels. The legal situation in Britain is the same today, so saunas which are default brothels are illegal, but prostitution is not (soliciting is illegal still). In Australia when I was younger, a massage parlour was a brothel by any other name.

In Australia living off the earnings of prostitution was progessively decriminalised commencing over 30 years ago, and now the industry is legal and the workers and / or brothels are registered (legislation varies state by state). Indeed some brothels have been listed on the sharemarket. As with Britain, prostitution in Australia was never illegal except for soliciting.

When I see the word 'offence' spelled offense I assume American or possibly Canadian. It's a give-away, isn't it?

[Suzi]

13 Miller's Court!!!!!!!!!

[markmorey5]

It's clear from Barnett's testimony that One Breezers Hill run by John and Mary McCarthy was a brothel, and we don't know how many other low-priced East End brothels there were at the time. West End brothels existed quite openly, of course.

[Bridewell]

Hi Mark,

Welcome to Casebook.

we don't know how many other low-priced East End brothels there were at the time.

I believe (from memory) that Don Rumbelow alluded to 63 in the immediate area (Whitechapel/Spitalfields).