enereally infected every
year. The largest number, she finds, is at the age of six, and the chief
cause appears to be, not lust, but superstition.
[241] For a discussion of inherited syphilis, see, e.g., Clement Lucas,
_Lancet_, February 1, 1908.
[242] Much harm has been done in some countries by the foolish and
mischievous practice of friendly societies and sick clubs of ignoring
venereal diseases, and not according free medical aid or sick pay to those
members who suffer from them. This practice prevailed, for instance, in
Vienna until 1907, when a more humane and enlightened policy was
inaugurated, venereal diseases being placed on the same level as other
diseases.
[243] Active measures against venereal disease were introduced in Sweden
early in the last century, and compulsory and gratuitous treatment
established. Compulsory notification was introduced many years ago in
Norway, and by 1907 there was a great diminution in the prevalence of
venereal diseases; there is compulsory treatment.
[244] See, e.g., Morrow, _Social Diseases and Marriage_, Ch. XXXVII.
[245] A committee of the Medical Society of New York, appointed in 1902 to
consider this question, reported in favor of notification without giving
names and addresses, and Dr. C.R. Drysdale, who took an active part in the
Brussels International Conference of 1899, advocated a similar plan in
England, _British Medical Journal_, February 3, 1900.
[246] Thus in Munich, in 1908, a man who had given gonorrhoea to a
servant-girl was sent to prison for ten months on this ground. The state
of German opinion to-day on this subject is summarized by Bloch,
_Sexualleben unserer Zeit_, p. 424.
[247] A. Despres, _La Prostitution a Paris_, p. 191.
[248] F. Aurientis, _Etude Medico-legale sur la jurisprudence actuelle a
propos de la Transmission des Maladies Veneriennes_, These de Paris, 1906.
[249] In England at present "a husband knowingly and wilfully infecting
his wife with the venereal disease, cannot be convicted criminally, either
under a charge of assault or of inflicting grievous bodily harm" (N.
Geary, _The Law of Marriage_, p. 479). This was decided in 1888 in the
case of _R. v. Clarence_ by nine judges to four judges in the Court for
the Consideration of Crown Cases Reserved.
[250] Modern democratic sentiment is opposed to the sequestration of a
prostitute merely because she is diseased. But there can be no reasonable
doubt whatever that if a dise
|