|
Medway News
26/3/1999
SIMON WELLS AND ALAN ROOTS
Book gets a handle on sordid scandal
Days of fighting and fornication
In many ways, it was like Dodge City. Rioters poured on to the streets in the evenings and harlots graced each and every pub. The inadequate 12-strong police force was a bad joke.
And where was this vile, lawless town? Why, it was our very own Chatham, circa 1880.
Modern-day councillors strive to put Medway on the map, but the task had already been achieved more than 100 years ago.
Chatham was as nationally infamous for its prostitutes as it was for its running street battles between soldiers and marines. And it could boast more public houses which doubled-up as brothels than anywhere else in the country.
The revelations, and subsequent furore, were labelled "The Chatham Scandal" by the newspapers of the day.
And that is also the title of a new book by former Hundred of Hoo history teacher Brian Joyce, which takes an educated peek under the petticoats of the town as it enjoyed the seamiest phase of its past.
The study, which focuses on the years from the 1860s to the 1890s, is published by Baggins Book Bazaar, in Rochester High Street, and will be launched at the Navy Days event in May.
Mr Joyce (49), of Rainham, discovered much about the town during his research. One fascinating fact is that the area of Chatham/Rochester High Street around Gundulph Road, so favoured by the working girls of today, was also a popular spot for Victorian prostitutes.
And residents were protesting even then. But the High Street was no match in seediness for The Brook where almost every pub was a house of ill-repute.
The sordid situation in the towns was revealed when the Government invoked the Contagious Diseases Act designed to look after the welfare of sailors who may have strayed brothel-bound while in port.
Powers in the Act allowed the authorities to forcibly "examine" any woman suspected to be a harlot. Wards at St. Bart's Hospital were designated for the task and they overflowed as hundreds of women were taken in.
But the Act was not univerally popular attracting criticism that it was humiliating for those involved -- many of whom were completely innocent. It was abandoned in the early 1880s.
|
|