Sin in the Second City (38 page)

“I am writing,” Minna said when she could speak again, “what I will call
The Biography of a Lost Soul.
”

The other madam, the quiet one, let the prim line of her lips soften into a smile.

T
he call from one of Roe’s private sleuths came on the evening of November 19. Maurice and Julia Van Bever, the detective said, were about to sell the Paris, the one on 2101 Armour Avenue, and flee to Paris—the one in France. If Roe hurried, he could stop them.

The prosecutor phoned the police, who raided the Paris, arrested both Van Bevers, and charged them with trafficking in women. The Frenchman and his madam were shipped off to the Bridewell for one year, their appeal from the state supreme court finally denied.

Van Bever’s partner, Big Jim Colosimo, still could not be reached.

But the arrest at last cleared the part of Roe’s brain where the case had lingered for a year, making room for tasks undone. There was his book promotion, for one thing. Presses across the country were churning out as many white slavery narratives as copies of the Bible. One, Reginald Wright Kauffman’s
The House of Bondage,
would go through eleven printings in less than nine months. And here was Roe, with his superior legal credentials and impressive analysis of the white slave evil, selling a fraction of that amount. Most insulting, Kauffman’s book was a
novel.

When, shortly after the turn of the new year, Roe received a letter from John D. Rockefeller Jr., he hoped the New Yorker had changed his mind about issuing praise for
Panders and Their White Slaves.
“I am sorry not to comply with your request for a statement regarding the book which could be used publicly,” Rockefeller had written previously. “I have been asked many times to make criticisms of books but have never done so except in the case of the book by Mr. Kauffman which deals with the problem of the social evil in New York.”

Rockefeller’s latest letter, however, didn’t mention Roe’s book. This time, in fact, it was the New Yorker who wanted something. “I propose,” the missive read, “that you come to New York as soon as you can close up matters in Chicago and undertake here just such a campaign as you have carried on in Chicago.” Rockefeller was offering $5,000 per year, and the public would be told that the prosecutor moved east to practice law, not to hunt white slavers. “The matter,” Rockefeller promised, “will be kept entirely among ourselves in the little group at this end.” If Roe agreed, he could start as soon as possible.

M
inna hired a professional photographer to capture all fifty rooms of the Everleigh Club. No pictures of the girls, she reminded him. This was a
tasteful
brochure, nothing like the crass calling cards that littered the Levee streets. Following him from parlor to parlor, boudoir to boudoir, she determined which angles and corners would best capture the whole, her only source of passion and point of pride—her entire world—framed between her hands. Don’t get just the beds and dressing areas, she ordered, but the alcoves, too, and several views of the ballroom, a close-up of the gilded throne in the Japanese Room, a shot of the Mosque Room leading into the Moorish Room, the puddle-deep rugs and gilded spittoons, the everleigh sign, each letter in exquisite scrolling cursive, suspended above the entry to the Pullman Buffet, the graceful turn of each hallway as it met the stairs.

Finished, he bound the best images between a rich leather cover. Minna called it “The Everleigh Club, Illustrated” and composed a simple introduction. “Fortunate indeed,” she wrote, “with all the comforts of life surrounding them, are the members of the Everleigh Club. This little booklet will convey but a faint idea of the magnificence of the club and its appointments.”

She mailed nearly two hundred brochures to regular and prospective clients, and gave a few to her most trusted courtesans to distribute at their discretion. To the outside world, the gesture would be seen as a classy reminder of a place that was already a household name. But in Chicago and throughout the Levee, the brochure was a deliberate challenge issued to those vying to shut the Everleigh Club down: Here it was, and here it would stay.

THE SOCIAL EVIL
IN CHICAGO

Mayor Carter Harrison II.

Here’s the difference between us and Dante: He wrote a lot about Hell and never saw the place. We’re writing about Chicago after looking the town over.

—C
ARL
S
ANDBURG

T
he First Ward aldermen were right. Like his father before him, fifty-year-old Carter Harrison II was seeking a fifth term as mayor of Chicago. The elder Harrison, assassinated by a mentally disturbed Irish immigrant at the close of the World’s Fair, was a Yale alumnus and Shakespearean scholar, but Chicago’s working class adored him nonetheless. “Our Carter” had been one of their own, at ease with any crowd or conversation, a popularity that transferred to his son.

The son, too, was handsome and charismatic, his mass of untamed black hair tempered by a dapper mustache. His campaign flyer for the 1911 election blared:
THE STREETS OF CHICAGO BELONG TO THE PEOPLE * PERSONAL LIBERTY * EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL * SPECIAL PRIVILEGES TO NONE * NO BLUE LAWS FOR CHICAGO
—an egalitarian message embraced by the city’s immigrant beer drinkers and saloon keepers. His policy regarding the Levee was similarly relaxed. “I have never been afflicted with Puritan leanings,” he wrote. “I have also recognized the apparent necessity of prostitution in such social organizations as have been so far perfected in this world of ours.”

Bathhouse John and Hinky Dink were thrilled to have their old comrade in the race, especially with the whiff of reform fouling the air. For the February 28 primary election, in which Harrison faced former Democratic mayor Edward Dunne, the First Ward bards hauled men in from flop-houses and the local insane asylum (prompting Hinky Dink to remark that the mentally ill were more politically astute than even the most erudite Republican). Scores of black voters, who had migrated north to Chicago pledging allegiance to the party of Lincoln, were rightfully converted by complimentary food and beer at Kenna’s saloon. When the machines were closed and votes tallied, Harrison emerged as the Democratic nominee, his margin of victory in the First Ward double that throughout the rest of the city.

The Republican opponent, Hyde Park reformer Charles Merriam, began lobbing personal insults against the aldermen. “Hinky Dink has put aside his mask of humility and buffoonery,” Merriam said, “and has come out to name Chicago’s mayor.” Publicly, Hinky Dink feigned shock and hurt, but privately he accelerated his efforts, raising the price of votes and assembling a venerable First Ward army to strategize. Ike Bloom, Solly Friedman, and Levee collector George Little reported right away. Suddenly, Big Jim Colosimo could be reached.

The
Tribune
treated Harrison’s victory with ho-hum indifference.
CARTER HARRISON ELECTED
, read the headline.
SAME OLD FRAUD IN RIVER WARDS
.

The mayor-elect prepared to move into the brand-new City Hall, a mammoth structure comprising one hundred thousand cubic feet of granite and 4 million bricks, its classical columns and soaring archways more suggestive of a Roman bath than municipal drudgery. But a pertinent issue would soon demand his attention: The Chicago Vice Commission was ready to submit its report.

O
n April 5, 1911, the day after the election, the thirty members of the commission gave a somber presentation to the city council and Mayor Fred Busse.
The Social Evil in Chicago
was a sociological marvel, a four-hundred-page tome that rivaled William Sanger’s groundbreaking 1858 work,
The History of Prostitution,
in the scope of its investigation. (To Bathhouse John and Hinky Dink’s dismay, the Vice Commission received another $5,000 to continue work in the first months of 1911.)

Divided into ten parts, with numerous subset categories and tangents, the report detailed every facet of prostitution in Chicago: cadets, the “fake marriage situation,” and obscene shows; “kept” women and unseemly couplings in manicure parlors; problems with whiskey, morphine, cocaine, murder, and theft; whether or not brothels prevented the rape of innocent women; and the “question of defectives, especially degenerates and sexual perverts.” Each finding was presented in the driest language possible, as if to emphasize that this was science, not porn for puritans.

All in all, the commission concluded, there were no fewer than 1,020 brothels in Chicago and five thousand full-time prostitutes—a “conservative but fair” estimate that didn’t account for the thousands of streetwalkers, part-timers, or girls who hustled on the side. The Levee’s annual profits from vice were calculated, “ultra” conservatively, at nearly $16 million per year ($328 million today). Harlots’ and madams’ names were changed, and an elaborate code replaced specific brothel addresses.

“The (X523), at (X524), (X524a) Dearborn Street,” read one entry about the Everleigh Club. “This is probably the most famous and luxurious house of prostitution in the country. The list received from the General Superintendent of Police on August 16, 1910, did not give the address of this house…the gilded palaces of sin patronized by the wealthy are immune from punishment, even to the extent of being saved the humiliation of appearing upon a police list.”

The report commented on “gregarious” men:

…there is a large number of men who are thoroughly gregarious in habit; who mostly affect the carriage, mannerisms, and speech of women…who are often people of a good deal of talent; who lean to the fantastic in dress…. In one of the large music halls recently, a much applauded act was that of a man who by facial expression and bodily contortion represented sex perversion, a most disgusting performance. It was evidently not at all understood by many of the audience….

On harlots in the Everleigh Club and other respected houses:

These women are the heavy money earners of some of the “best” houses in Chicago. The majority of them are apparently in robust health…[they] hold the lead in professional prostitution and earn weekly from $50 to $400. This would seem to largely disprove…the solemn statement…that “in five years these girls will all be dead.”

And on what Minna would call “wear and tear”:

It is undoubtedly true that the women in houses are longer lived and better off than the street walker or possibly than the clandestine prostitute—with her, service is largely mechanical—not an act appealing to sentiment or affection—while with the latter type especially, the physical stress upon her body and nerves and strength caused by expression of “love” as they understand it, makes demands upon endurance that are unknown to the professional prostitute.

On causes, during one particular survey, for entering the life:

Nine were seduced; three could not earn enough to live on in any other way; two were enticed by other women into the life; two were too ignorant to do any ordinary work; two lost their husbands by death and two by desertion; two said they were naturally bad, one said she wanted to, was “born with the devil in her,” the other that she “was bad with boys before she was 15” two for dress; two ruined by drink and one each on account of trouble with family, poverty, money and because she was tired of drudgery (this girl said dance halls ruined her).