Godley, Arthur, for The House of Commons — East India Contagious Diseases #7 1897

London, England, The House of Commons, by Her Majesty's Stationery Office, by Eyre and Spottiswoode, Printers to the Queen's Most Excellent Majesty, 1897. First Edition. Softcover. Size: 4to 11" - 13" tall. A Good condition ink-stamped Circular written for the House of Commons by Arthur Godley regarding the desire to reinstate by appeals in this Memorial, the dictates of the Contagious Diseases Acts, enacted first in the 1860s and 1870s and extended throughout the Commonwealth, including to India, but repealed by the British Women's Temperance Association. 13" tall x 8 1/3" wide. Five pages, two leaves, folded twice. Light chipping along edges, two short, closed tears to edges, ink-stamp to top, lightly and evenly toned, else in easily Good condition and all readable. Comprised of a brief communique by Walter S.B. McLaren to the Right Honourable Lord George Hamilton, M.P. and Secretary of State for India, then a shorter one by James Stuart, submitted on behalf of "61,437 Women of the United Kingdom," also addressed to the Right Honourable Lord George Hamilton, M.P., Secretary of State of India. They opposed both the Contagious Diseases Acts (which had already been repealed) but also any legislation which aimed to bring them back on-line, though not perhaps in an intuitive manner. Their appeal was not so much against the misogyny encoded in the Acts, but rather, with the attempts to "regulate immorality," that is, make a Pact with the Devil in allowing and enabling (by regulating) prostitution. The Acts were introduced in England to attempt to regulate "common prostitutes," in order allegedly to reduce the prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases within the British army and navy and close kindred. Their inspiration followed long and faulty and misogynist associations of sex and sin and disease and regulation with women and girls, stretching from ancient Hebrews and Grecians and Romans and thenceforward. Applied also to military encampments and to garrison towns and ports, expanding eventually throughout the Commonwealth, India to Australia and to all manner of public spaces. The provisions of the Acts made unlawful, women who were suspected of engaging in prostitution and who failed to register as such with the police in any given locale. They were made to submit to an invasive medical examination allegedly to clear her of infection with an STD. The Act empowered police and ministers, businessmen and tavern-owners, eventually, the right to define who was and who was not a prostitute. If the woman was found to be suffering from a venereal disease, typically either syphilis or gonorrhoea, she would be confined to a "lock hospital" until pronounced "clean," that is, putatively uninfected. The only alternative for such a woman hemmed in so was to agree to three months' imprisonment (extended to six months in the 1869 Act) or ditto, at hard labor. The Acts did not enforce the examination of men, nor were men ever considered vectors of infection as such. The unjust nature of the Act and its unequal application evoked outrage among the British public and Christian societies. It was eventually repealed through the efforts of Josephine Butler and others, she having founded the Ladies' National Association (L.N.A.) to campaign against the implementation of the Act. This broadside is a perfect exemplar of all that was inspired by and wrong with the Act (and some forms of opposition to it).Member, I.O.B.A., C.B.A., and adherent to the highest ethical standards. . . . Good