000			03309cam a22003373u 4500
001			76301
003			UtSlPG
005			20260610134751.0
006			m
007			cr n
008			260607r20251871utu|||||o|||||||||||||| d
040			_aUtSlPG
041		7	_aen _2iso639-1
050		4	_aHQ _aKD
100	1		_aButler, Josephine Elizabeth Grey, _d1828-1906
245	1	4	_aThe constitution violated
264		1	_aSalt Lake City, UT : _bProject Gutenberg, _c2025
300			_a1 online resource : _bmultiple file formats
336			_atext _btxt _2rdacontent
337			_acomputer _bc _2rdamedia
338			_aonline resource _bcr _2rdacarrier
500			_aAdvocates the repeal of the Contagious Diseases Acts of 1866, 1868 and 1869.
500			_aRelease date is 2025-06-15
508			_aRichard Tonsing and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This book was produced from images made available by the HathiTrust Digital Library.)
520			_a"The Constitution Violated" by Josephine Elizabeth Grey Butler is a political essay written in the late 19th century. It denounces the British Contagious Diseases Acts as a fundamental breach of constitutional liberties—especially Magna Carta, habeas corpus, and trial by jury—and warns that state regulation of prostitution endangers civil freedom and public morality. Addressed to working men and women, it portrays the Acts as an assault on national rights that especially imperils poor and unprotected women. The opening of the essay declares its aim to rouse the country by proving the Acts unconstitutional, setting aside medical arguments and focusing on core constitutional principles. It centers on Magna Carta’s protections—particularly the clauses safeguarding liberty, property, and trial by jury—arguing that forced bodily examinations amount to unlawful “destruction,” and it illustrates England’s historic jealousy of such violations. The author clarifies that the Acts apply to civilians (not the army or navy) while placing civil districts under the Admiralty and War Office; she outlines how a police superintendent’s oath and a magistrate’s order can subject a woman to repeated examinations, detention, hospital confinement, and effective outlawry without a jury, with a single policeman’s testimony often sufficing. She argues this is no “minor case,” since a woman’s honor, liberty, and livelihood are at stake, and she condemns coercive “voluntary submissions” and summary procedures that invert the Habeas Corpus spirit. Drawing on authorities like Coke, Blackstone, and Creasy—and paralleling a 1736 Lords debate on anti-smuggling powers—she warns against informers, punishment of mere “intent,” and executive overreach. The section closes by invoking Chatham’s moral appeal, contrasting past constitutional vigilance with recent parliamentary silence as the Acts elevate vice into a regulated system. (This is an automatically generated summary.)
534			_pOriginally published: _cEdinburgh: Edmonston and Douglas, 1871
653			_aConstitutional law -- Great Britain
653			_aProstitutes -- Legal status, laws, etc. -- Great Britain
856	4		_uhttps://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000263927
856	4	0	_uhttps://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/76301
999			_c117026 _d117026