In an anonymous pamphlet, entitled “Prostitution in Berlin,” is another hideous picture:
“In the Königstadt there is a drinking saloon where, besides the wife of the host, there are two young girls who exceed all compeers in shamelessness and depravity. The elder betrays secondary syphilis in her voice; the younger has such noble features, is of such beauty, and is altogether of such prepossessing appearance, that the infamy of her conduct is incredible. In the evening these girls and the host are generally drunk. At one or two in the morning the place is a perfect hell, the whole company, guests, host, and girls, being mad with liquor. Some are dancing with the girls to the tinkle of a guitar, the player of which acted her part in one of the abolished brothels; others are roaring obscene songs. If the guitar-player has brought her daughter, then the tumult of the den is complete. It is never closed before four o’clock in the morning, when the girls retire to their dwellings in company with one or the other of their guests.”
In reading these descriptions, it must be remembered that, under the toleration system, the police would not permit prostitutes to visit places of public amusement, nor would they allow music and dancing in the brothels.
Another part of Dr. Sass’s work contains a truly horrid picture of the immorality of the city. We transcribe it, in conclusion of this branch of the subject:
PRIVATE LIFE IN BERLIN.
“... Let us enter the house. The first floor is inhabited by a family of distinction; husband and wife have been separated for years; he lives on one side, she on the other; both go out in public together; the proprieties are kept in view, but servants will chatter. On the second floor lives an assessor with his kept woman. When he is out of town, as the house is well aware, a doctor pays her a visit. On the other side the staircase lives a carrier, with his wife and child. The wife had not mentioned that this child was born before marriage; he found it out; of course they quarreled, and he now takes his revenge in drunkenness, blows, and abuse. We ascend to the third floor. On the right of the stairs is a teacher who has had a child by his wife’s sister; the wife grieves sorely over the same. With him lodges a house-painter who ran away from his wife and three children, and now lives, with his concubine and one child, in a wretched little cupboard. On the left is a letter-carrier’s family. His pay is fifteen thalers (twelve dollars) a month, but the people seem very comfortable. Their daughter has a very nice front room, well furnished, and is kept by a very wealthy merchant, a married man. Exactly opposite there is a house of accommodation, and close by there is a midwife, whose sign-board announces ‘An institute for ladies of condition, where they can go through their confinement in retirement.’ I can assure the reader that in this sketch of sexual and family life in Berlin I have ‘nothing extenuated, nor set down aught in malice.’”
In estimating the effects of the suppression of brothels, it will be necessary to take medical testimony. In Dr. Loewe’s pamphlet, “Prostitution with reference to Berlin, 1852,” we find:
“In vain the Charité, after the ordinary wards were full of venereal patients, set aside other parts of the building. The patients were still poured in from the houses of detention, until, at length, the directors of the Charité refused farther admission, the consequence of which was a long and angry correspondence between them and the police. The Minister of the Interior interfered, and ordered more accommodation for the Charité. This was done, but the new wards were soon filled with venereal females; the patients exceeded the accommodations, and at last it was found necessary to take the Cholera Lazaret for syphilitic cases. Against this arrangement the magistracy of Berlin remonstrated that the present influx of venereal patients must be regarded as the inevitable, natural consequence of the abolition of the brothels; that this abolition had not originated with them, therefore they were not bound to provide for it.”
Dr. Behrend, to whose work we have already alluded, gives much statistical information, from original documents, showing the results of suppression. He says:
“In 1839, out of 1200 women brought to punishment for begging and similar offenses, there were about 600 common unregistered prostitutes. In 1840, the period of reducing the number of brothels, there were 900 such women. In 1847, a year after their suppression, there were 1250 notorious prostitutes. Those, in the opinion of the police, constituted but a portion of those who practiced prostitution, but yet had an apparent means of living. Behind the Königsmauer the traffic is carried on worse than formerly, while the place itself is the scene of disorder and irregularity, which used not to be under the former system. These offenses can not be punished, owing to the difficulties of technical proof which must always exist. The police have done what is possible by continually patrolling the streets, and arresting openly objectionable characters, and even those who are informed against as being diseased, but they can do no more. The prostitution which was formerly confined within a limited district is now spread over the whole town.”