WOLFENDEN DEBATE SIR, Mr. Michael Foot's letter was calculated to
appal you into submission. But is he not entirely erroneous in his interpretation?
If he will read the Wolfenden Report he will see that the carpet under which Pharos would like the dirt brushed is not a prison cell but the business premises of the women in question (which, I hope for everyone's sake, will be at least warm and com- fortable), and even sometimes, with safeguards and qualifications, public houses, cafés and coffee stalls (para. 351).
The question is whether a fine will clear the streets, or will it be accepted as a form of taxation (if more than taxation, i.e., if not paid, it will end up in prison anyway, and I should prefer the direct to the hypocritical approach). That the streets must be cleared will be argued by almost all, Certainly by those who have the misfortune to live in or near them. But from the humanitarian viewpoint should Mr. Foot not support the committee? The Bays- water Road is a cold, wet and draughty place to hang about in these winter evenings.
The committee covered every point 1 have seen raised anywhere, and presented the arguments lucidly, reasonably and comprehensively. On Mr. Foot's issue paragraphs 285 to 290 leave no doubt in my mind that their proposals are right. And in their reasoning they have included more forcibly than most moralists the vital and urgent responsibility of the very young prostitute. They deal not only with the need to reduce demand by reducing the advertising (a point Mr. Noel- Baker might perhaps explain to Mr. Foot), but of discouraging the newcomer by talk of bad examples (para. 289) and perhaps most important giving the probation officers some strong support.
When one turns from the sense and reason of the committee's report to the folly and emotionalism of the Commons debate one can easily be depressed. Surely Mr. Foot need not further depress us by abandoning his customary good sense.—Yours faith-
fully, A. A. DUMONT 55 Abingdon Villas, W8
Previous page
