I would like to thank the members of the German Women's History Study Group, who read an earlier version of this article and gave me many useful suggestions and criticisms.

1. For the growth of prostitution in Wilhelmian cities, see Schulte, Regina, Sperrbezirke. Tugendhaftigkeit und Prostitution in der bürgerlichen Welt (Frankfurt, 1984), 18–24.Google Scholar

2. See Meyer-Renschhausen, Elizabeth, Weibliche Kultur und soziale Arbeit. Eine Geschichte der Frauenbewegung am Beispiel Bremens 1810–1927 (Cologne, 1989), 273, 345–49.Google Scholar

3. See Schulte, Sperrbezirke, 249. See also Pappritz, Anna, ed., Einführung in das Studium der Prostitutionsfrage (Leipzig, 1919), 30.Google Scholar

4. For an example of this schema of victimization in abolitionist rhetoric, see Pappritz, Anna, Herrenmoral, 8th ed., (Leipzig, n. d.), 17.Google Scholar For a discussion of how victimization was used in abolitionist rhetoric, see Meyer-Renschhausen, Elizabeth, “Die weibliche Ehre. Ein Kapitel aus dem Kampf von Frauen gegen Polizei und Ärzte,” in Geyer-Kordesch, Johanna and Kuhn, Annette, eds., Frauenkörper, Medizin, Sexualität (Düsseldorf, 1986), 83–85;Google Scholar see also Walkowitz, Judith, “Male vice and Feminist Virtue: Feminism and the Politics of Prostitution in Nineteenth-Century Britain,” History Workshop 13 (1982): 80–82.Google Scholar

5. This very real threat was present in internal discussions held within the bourgeois women's movement, and also in the culture as a whole, as evidenced by Henrik Ibsen's play, Ghosts.

6. For the rejection of this libertarian approach by the churches and conservatives, see Gibson, Mary, Prostitution and the State in Italy (London, 1986), 72–73.Google Scholar

7. See Gibson, Prostitution, 71–84; see also Corbin, Alain, Women for Hire. Prostitution and Sexuality in France after 1850 (London, 1990), 280–97.Google Scholar

8. Corbin, Women for Hire, 291–93.

9. See Kaplan, Marion, “Prostitution, Morality Crusades, and Feminism,” Women's Studies International Forum 5 (1982): 619–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10. Walkowitz, “Male Vice,” 80–82. For more on the Victorian abolitionist movement by the same author, see Prostitution and Victorian Society (Cambridge, 1980)Google Scholar. Throughout this essay, I compare the British abolitionists studied by Walkowitz (along with abolitionist campaigns launched in other European nations) with the Hanover abolitionist campaign. Although I am aware of the problems inherent in using Britain as a standard for measuring German “progress,” I think that it is justifiable to use the British case for comparison in this instance. The German abolitionists were part of an international antiregulation organization that had been founded and was led by Josephine Butler and other British women. German abolitionists, including Hanover abolitionists, were familiar with British abolitionist rhetoric, tactics, and campaigns, as well as the tactics used by abolitionists in France and Italy. Thus, if Hanover abolitionists did not advance the same objections and arguments used by British abolitionists, it seems fair to conclude that these omissions were a deliberate choice on the part of Hanover abolitionists, a choice that is worth noting and analyzing.

11. For Butler's role in inspiring the creation of abolitionist movements in France and Italy, see Corbin, Women for Hire, 214–17, and Gibson, Prostitution, 41–45.

12. Gibson, Prostitution, 50.

13. Ibid., 50.

14. Corbin, Women for Hire, 227–28.

15. Pappritz, Herrenmoral, 16–17.

16. Meyer-Renschhausen, Weibliche Kultur, 336–7.

17. Evans, Richard J., The Feminist Movement in Germany 1894–1933 (Beverly Hills, 1976), 43, 56–60.Google Scholar

18. Meyer-Renschhausen, Weibliche Kultur, 362–63.

19. See Kent, Susan Kingsley, Sex and Suffrage in Britain, 1860–1914 (Princeton, 1987), 5–14.Google Scholar

20. See Schulte, Sperrbezirke, 249.

21. Pappritz, Einführung, 30.

22. Archive of the German Evangelical Women's League (hereafter, ADEF), V23, “Sittenpolizeiliche Vorschriften.”

23. Berger, Heinrich, Die Prostitution in Hannover (Berlin, 1902), 40.Google Scholar

24. Ibid., 17–19.

25. Ibid., 20, 30.

26. ADEF, V23, minutes of a meeting between DEF officers and police officials, dated 14 November 1906. Unfortunately, it is not possible to determine how police arrived at their estimate of the number of unregistered prostitutes.

27. Berger, Die Prostitution, 7, 25–26. See also Ulrich, Anita, Bordelle, Strassendimen, und bürgerliche Sittlichkeit in der Belle Epoque (Zurich, 1985), 32;Google Scholar ADEF, V23, “Bericht des Kriminal-Kommissars Haake über verschiedene Punkte der Broschüre des Kreisarztes Dr. med. Berger,” 4. The same opportunities for escaping registration existed in Berlin; see Schulte, Sperrbezirke, 20.

28. This figure is based on the assumption that unregistered prostitutes, like registered prostitutes, were primarily drawn from the 18–25 year old age group (as were 68 percent of registered prostitutes), and that almost all were single, divorced, or separated. There were 16,592 single, divorced, or separated women in this age group in Hanover in 1905. If one assumes that approximately 1,250 women worked as prostitutes at any given time (1,000 unregistered and 250 registered), of whom 68 percent were between 18 and 25 years old, then one out of every twenty single young women in this age group resorted to prostitution at least temporarily. This figure is not excessive when compared to contemporaries' estimates of the extent of prostitution in other large German cities; see Schulte, Sperrbezirke, 19–22.

29. See the Provincial Archive of the Lutheran Provincial Church of Hanover (hereafter, LKAH), S3d 112, annual reports of the Magdalene Society.

30. From a flyer distributed by the Friends (n.d.), in LKAH, E2 391.

31. Taken from a history of the Friends' Hanover branch and the society's annual reports, in LKAH, E2 391.

32. Weber's announcement is reprinted in Mueller, Paula, ed., Handbuch zur Frauenfrage. Der Deutsch-Evangelische Frauenbund in seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklung, seinen Zielen, und seiner Arbeit (Berlin, 1908), 16.Google Scholar

33. Taken from Pagenstecher's memoir on the origins of the DEF, ADEF, B 1.

34. These details were taken from ADEF, B 7 III, which contain biographical sketches of Mueller, written by her associates. In 1919, when Mueller was elected to the Reichstag, she changed her name to Otfried-Mueller.

35. see especially Mueller's correspondence with other DEF officers and with other leaders of the women's movement in ADEF, B1, B 14, 0 12, and 0 9b passim.

36. For the creation of the women's Konservative Vereinigung, see the flyer announcing its creation in ADEF, H1b; see also Hackett, Amy, “The Politics of Feminism in Wilhelmine Germany, 1890–1918” (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1976), 781–808, 827–31.Google Scholar For Mueller's role as a DNVP Reichstag deputy, see the brief biography of her in Schroeder, Hiltrud, ed., Sophie & Co. Bedeutende Frauen Hannovers (Hanover, 1991), 250–51.Google Scholar

37. From the annual reports in ADEF, Akten der Ortsgruppe Hannover.

38. See Reagin, Nancy Ruth, “Bourgeois Women, Local Politics, and Social Change: The Women's Movement in Hanover, 1880–1933” (Ph.D. diss., The Johns Hopkins University, 1990)Google Scholar, Appendix, for the methods used to determine the political affiliation of husbands and fathers of DEF members. See also Hilpert, Christiana, “Die Geschichte des Deutsch-Evangelischen Frauenbundes 1899–1914”, (M.A. thesis, The Ruhr University at Bochum, 1982), 20.Google Scholar

39. See Adelheid von Bennigsen's correspondence with Eyl, Wehrhahn, and Wespy in the Municipal Archive of Hanover (hereafter, STAH), XV Gb 150, passim. See also Erna von der Gröben's letter to Pastor Meyer, dated 26 October 1904, in LKAH, E2 379.

40. See Reagin, “Bourgeois Women,” 146–7.

41. The overlap between the Hanover DEF's leadership and the steering committees of other women's organizations was demonstrated, for example, by the fact that Anna Ramsauer and Mathilde Drees, who headed the two largest Hanoverian women teachers' associations, were also in the executive of the DEF.

42. For a discussion of the concern over “social degeneration” among German reformers, see Peukert, Detlev, Grenzen der Sozialdisziplinierung. Aufstieg und Krise der deutschen Jugendfürsorge 1878 bis 1932 (Cologne, 1986), 42–48, 120–22.Google Scholar These concerns were widespread in Europe; for the discourse over degeneration in France during the same period, see Weber, Eugen, France, Fin de Siècle (London, 1986), 9–26.Google Scholar

43. Reagin, “Bourgeois Women,” 130–34.

44. Mueller, Paula, Welche Aufgaben erwachsen der Frau aus der sittlichen Not unserer Zeit? (Hanover, 1906), 1.Google Scholar

45. Reagin, “Bourgeois Women,” chapters 3 and 4, passim.

46. Ibid., 155.

47. Ibid., 149.

48. Ibid., 145.

49. ADEF, V23, “Besondere Aktensammlung: Abänderung der sittenpolizeilichen Vorschriften,” “Kurze Notizen aus den Akten” 1, and “Bericht des Kriminal-Kommissars Haake über verschiedene Punkte der Broschüre des Kreisarztes Dr. med. Berger,” 9. The existence of ADEF V23, “Besondere Aktensammlung,” is itself an important piece of evidence, one that tells a great deal about the relationship between municipal officials and the DEF leadership. The history of this file is as follows. In February 1907, the head of police ordered that police files relating to the issue of prostitution in Hanover be loaned to the DEF, so that its officers could study the background of this question, as it was documented in the police archives (see the letter from the police to Mueller, dated 20 February 1907 in ADEF V23). The DEF officers apparently studied these files, made extensive notes on their contents, and then returned the originals; thus, V23 contains DEF notes and excerpts from the police files (this is fortunate, since the originals no longer exist). The files included memoranda on internal police meetings about how best to regulate prostitution (the quotes given on the “shortage” of prostitutes are taken from the DEF notes on these meetings, which quote the memoranda directly), copies of citizens' complaints about prostitutes' behavior, copies of the regulations applied to prostitutes, reports by police officers on the activities of prostitutes in various neighborhoods, and a report by police commissioner Haake about Dr. Berger's book on prostitution in Hanover. The fact that the police would lend Mueller their own files speaks volumes about the congenial, collegial relationship that DEF officers had with the police and city officials, a relationship that is also documented in the DEF notes taken during meetings with police officials, also in ADEF V23.

50. See Vicinus, Martha, “Sexuality and Power: A Review of Current Work in the History of Sexuality,” Feminist Studies 8 (1982): 136–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

51. ADEF, V23, “Besondere Aktensammlung: Abänderung der sittenpolizeilichen Vorschriften” and “Kurze Notizen aus den Akten.”

52. ADEF, V23, “Kurze Notizen aus den Akten,” 1–5.

53. ADEF, V23, memorandum from Polizeirat Titze to the Regierungspräsident (n.d.). The content of the document indicates that this memo was written in early October 1906.

54. The Hanover Federation chapter was the first local chapter to be founded of any “progressive” feminist women's organizations, i.e., the first local chapter of any of the organizations which belonged to the Verband Fortschrittlicher Frauenvereine, which is generally considered to define the “left” or feminist wing of the Bund Deutscher Frauenvereine. For a list of all Hanover women's associations which joined the anti-Kasemierung alliance, see the signatories to a petition reprinted in Evangelische Frauenzeitung 7 (1906–1907): 28–29.Google Scholar

55. See Duensing's work history in STAH, Lehrer. Personalakten von Volksschullehrern: Duensing, Bertha. See also the annual reports of her temperance restaurants in STAH, XV Gb 171.

56. Mueller, Paula, Einsame Frauen (Berlin, 1906), 9 (this pamphlet is a reprint of a speech given by Mueller at several meetings during the last half of 1906).Google Scholar

57. From a petition submitted on 23 December 1906 by twenty-two women's organizations to local authorities. A copy is in ADEF, V23. See the first petition submitted by the Federation in the Hannoverscher Anzeiger 14, no. 245 (19 October 1906): 2.

58. Ibid.

59. See the copy of the petition submitted by the women's alliance in ADEF V23.

60. See Meyer-Renschhausen, “Weibliche Ehre,” 85.

61. See Walkowitz, “Male Vice,” 80–84; see also Kent, Sex and Suffrage, 67–75, 106–11, 196.

62. See Meyer-Renschhausen, ‘Weibliche Ehre,”; 91.

63. See Meyer-Renschhausen, Weibliche Kultur, 364ff; see also Kent, Sex and Suffrage, 5ff.

64. In Bremen, where bourgeois women leaders did make alliances with working-class leaders, the alliance was with the local SPD; see Meyer-Renschhausen, Weibliche Kultur, 260. The question of why Bremen feminists were willing to work with the local SPD, and indeed why they stood to the left of the Hanover movement as a whole, is interesting, but beyond the scope of this article. I am currently finishing a book on the Hanover women's movement which will examine the differences between “moderate” local movements, such as Hanover's, and the more radical feminist movements that established themselves in Hamburg and Bremen; my study will examine each movement's rhetoric, tactics, and achievements.

65. See Mueller, Einsame Frauen, 14, and Welche Aufgaben, 14–15.

66. See ADEF, V23, memorandum from Mueller and von der Gröben to police, dated 26 November 1906.

67. Ibid. This position echoed demands put forth by both the national abolitionist leadership and by local Hanover abolitionists. See “Verschiedenes,” Der Abolitionist 5 (1906): 8; Hannoverscher Anzeiger 14, no. 245 (19 October 1906): 2. Mueller was still espousing the same position ten years later when she proposed amending the penal code to read “it shall be a punishable offense to disturb public order or public decency through the commission of immoral acts, or through furthering or soliciting immoral acts.” See the exchange of letters between Mueller and Herr Lie. Mumm dated 9 November 1916 and 11 November 1916 in ADEF, V22b.

68. Minutes of these meetings, which were held on 14 October, 14 November, and 1 December 1906, are in ADEF, V23.

69. The police fell back upon “localization” in private meetings with the DEF as early 14 November 1906, did not announce their change in plans publicly until 2 December 1906. See the minutes of the 14 November meeting with DEF leaders in ADEF, V23; “Verschiedenes,” Der Abolitionist 6 (1907): 16.Google Scholar

70. See ADEF, V23 for the letter from the police that accompanied the copies of records sent to the DEF. See also Evans, The Feminist Movement, 56–61, for Heymann's legal battles with the Hamburg police.

71. From the Hannoversche Grundbesitzer Zeitung, 28 October 1906. It is not possible to give the volume number or page or this article, since the originals are no longer available. A copy of this article is preserved in ADEF, V23. In addition, see ADEF, V23, “Kurze Notizen aus den Akten,” 5–7.

72. ADEF, V23, copies of articles from the Hannoversche Grundbesitzer Zeitung, 28 October 1906 and 29 January 1907. The same dualistic view of women, which assigned all women to one of two sexual categories, was prevalent in Britain; see Kent, Sex and Suffrage, 62–63.

73. ADEF, V23, “Bericht des Kriminal-Kommissars Haake über verschiedene Punkte der Broschüre des Kreisarztes Dr. med. Berger,” 4.

74. See the newspaper accounts in the Hannoverscher Anzeiger 15, no. 12 (15 January 1907): 6, and in the Hannoversches Tageblatt 56, no. 15 (15 January 1907): Beilage 5.

75. Regina Schulte notes that the need to distinguish between “decent women” and prostitutes was used to justify Kasernierung in several cities; Schulte, Sperrbezirke, 27.

76. From the Hannoverscher Anzeiger 14, no. 291 (16 December 1906): 5.

77. The petition was dated 17 December 1906; a copy is in ADEF, V23.

78. See, for example, Lida Gustava Heymann's comment that to disrupt public meetings at the local level was unheard of in Wilhelmian bourgeois political culture. In Heymann, Lida Gustava and Augspurg, Anita, Erlebtes-Erschautes. Deutsche Frauen kämpfen für Freiheit, Recht und Frieden, 1850–1940 (Meisenheim am Glan, 1972), 106.Google Scholar

79. From an editorial which appeared in the Freie Meinung on 19 January 1907. Unfortunately, the volume and page numbers cannot be given, since the original is no longer available. A copy of the editorial is in ADEF, V23.

80. See the Hannover Courier, 53, no. 26577 (15 January 1907): 5, and the Hannovershes Tageblatt 15, no. 78 (29 March 1907): Beilage 3.

81. From the minutes of a meeting between DEF officers and Frl. Duensing, dated 13 February 1907, in ADEF, V23.

82. See number 44 above, especially the minutes of the 14 October meeting. The DEF and the Federation finally broke with each other publicly over the issue of meetings in April 1907. See the letters in the Hannover Courier 54, no. 26756 (5 April 1907): 5, and the Hannoversches Tageblatt 56, no. 97 (6 April 1907): 6.

83. For the fears expressed by the chief of police, see the minutes of the 14 October meeting with DEF leaders in ADEF, V23. For the protests of the neighborhood associations and the divisions within the ranks of the pro-Kasernierung coalition, see the announcement of the Bürgerverein Fernroder Stadtteile in the Hannoverscher Anzeiger 14, no. 251 (6 November 1906): 5 and the Hannoversches Tageblatt 56, no. 103 (12 April 1907): 6.

84. For a discussion of the DEF network of services and kinship ties, see Reagin, “Bourgeois Women,” chap. 3, passim.

85. Pappritz, Einführung, 232; see also Evans, The Feminist Movement, 53–63.

86. For material on the foundation and activities of the cartel, see ADEF, V24 (“Das Kartell Hannoverscher und Lindener Vereine zur Bekämpfung öffentlicher sittlicher Schäden”).

87. See the descriptions of other, similar abolitionist campaigns in ADEF, V22a 1, 2 (“Prostitutionsfrage”).

88. See Kent, Sex and Suffrage, especially chapters 2, 6, and 7.

89. For the shift to the right of the national German women's movement after 1908, see Evans, The Feminist Movement, 148–58; see also Greven-Aschoff, Barbara, Die bürgerliche Frauenbewegung in Deutschland, 1894–1933 (Göttingen, 1981), 104–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar