The Story of Abortion in America E-Book

Marvin Olasky

• Herausgeber: Crossway
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2022

Beschreibung

Tracing the History of Abortion in America by Looking beyond the Laws to the Dramatic Stories and Colorful Personalities of the People They Touched Fifty years ago, the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision to legalize abortion-on-demand sparked nationwide tensions that continue to this day. In the decades since that ruling, abortion opponents and proponents have descended on the Capitol each year for marches and protests. But this story didn't begin with the Supreme Court in the 1970s; arguments about abortion have been a part of American history since the 17th century. So how did we get here? The Story of Abortion in America traces the long cultural history of this pressing issue from 1652 to today, focusing on the street-level activities of those drawn into the battles willingly or unwillingly. Authors Marvin Olasky and Leah Savas show complex lives on both sides: Some sacrificed much to help the poor and others sacrificed the helpless to empower themselves. The Story of Abortion in America argues that whatever happens legally won't end the debate, but it will affect lives.  - A Fair Survey of the History of the Debate: Opening with a foreword by renowned social conservative thinker Robert P. George, this book explores historic cases and key cultural moments from 1652 to 2022 - Examines 5 Selling Points Used by Each Side in Different Eras: Anatomy, Bible, Community, Danger, and Enforcement - Chronicles the History of Abortion through Personal Narratives: Includes the memorable stories of Isaac Hathaway, Susan Warren, Elizabeth Lumbrozo, John McDowell, Hugh Hodge, Madame Restell, Augustus St. Clair, Inez Burns, Robert Dickinson, Sherri Finkbine, Henry Hyde, John Piper, Lila Rose, Terrisa Bukovinac, Mark Lee Dickson, and many others - Written for a Diverse Audience: While particularly useful for Christians who want to understand the history of abortion and its impact on American politics and culture, the book speaks to anyone who cares about abortion 

Leseprobe

Thank you for downloading this Crossway book.

Sign up for the Crossway Newsletter for updates on special offers, new resources, and exciting global ministry initiatives:

Crossway Newsletter

Or, if you prefer, we would love to connect with you online:

“A riveting story of the history of abortion by two ‘street-level’ researchers who tell us real stories of real people who have sought abortions, provided abortions, and lobbied for change in the abortion laws. Spanning nearly four hundred years of abortion history, Olasky and Savas transport us back in time to help us understand that there has always been abortion among women ‘seduced by men, money, or the religion of self.’ Many of these abortions were coerced, and the chilling narratives of these coercions throughout history are not for the faint of heart. Readers will be moved to tears by the stories, many of them transcribed from published accounts of the very words of the women who have been victims of the abortion industry and those who support it. We meet many of the craven abortion providers on these pages—the infamous Madame Restell, as well as a long list of lesser-known profiteers who have grown rich by ending the lives of unborn children. It is a tragic history, but Olasky and Savas do not leave us bereft of hope.”

Anne Hendershott, Professor of Sociology and Director of the Veritas Center for Ethics in Public Life, Franciscan University

“Under the reign of Roe v. Wade, abortion became ‘normal.’ But it wasn’t always that way in our nation, as this book explains. Now that the Supreme Court has removed its imprimatur from abortion-on-demand for any reason through all nine months of pregnancy, how do we restore respect for the tiniest among us and care for their mothers? Olasky and Savas provide crucial historical context for this effort, and everyone from the newly minted pro-life student to the battle-worn anti-abortion veteran will glean valuable insight from these pages.”

Kristan Hawkins, President, Students for Life Action and Students for Life of America

“What an amazing work! Olasky and Savas have made an important contribution on a topic that is both so controversial and also so essential to the understanding of what America has become and what it will be as a nation in the future. Indeed, this book is a reminder that our nation’s abortion history is linked to its destiny, especially if we seek to offer compassion, hope, and help to those at risk for abortion and their vulnerable unborn children.”

Roland C. Warren, President and CEO, Care Net; author, Raising Sons of Promise: A Guide to Single Mothers of Boys

“Olasky and Savas convey a largely unknown, and as yet unfinished, account of the deep struggle between individual and human rights, worldviews and wickedness. The Story of Abortion in America captures the real and raw nature of the battleground over, and for, the unborn. In these pages you’ll find selfless servants and the profiteering powerful. Just as other great moral issues have stretched and torn the fabric of America, so has abortion. This work should be read by everyone concerned for the soul of America.”

Jor-El Godsey, President, Heartbeat International

“The Story of Abortion in America is a tour de force providing a chronicle of the history of abortion that is impeccably documented with near-cinematic realism. The facts are compelling, the human beings—including the unborn—are vividly portrayed, and the interpretations are invariably thoughtful. There is enough in this landmark work to upset easy conclusions about abortion across the full spectrum of opinion. Anyone who wrestles with this topic, as Olasky has done for a lifetime and Savas now follows, must grapple with this account on an issue that will not, and must not, go away.”

Chuck Donovan, President, Charlotte Lozier Institute

“This remarkable and timely book should become the go-to narrative for anyone seeking to understand the tragic history and innumerable human costs of abortion in America. I recommend it enthusiastically.”

Thomas S. Kidd, Research Professor of Church History, Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary; author, Thomas Jefferson: A Biography of Spirit and Flesh

“In this book that is more than just a history of abortion in America, Olasky and Savas have amassed an impressive account through real-life stories of how abortion has impacted everyday people over the centuries. The detailed stories were often tragic and heartbreaking and remind us that, truly, it is everyday people who matter most in the abortion debate. It is astonishing to read how much has changed about abortion over the centuries, but also how much really has not. Those who face unplanned pregnancies and those who seek to help them are the ones who write the real life-and-death stories of abortion and are also the ones who can change the world for the better, one life at a time. This captivating book will certainly help cultivate some of that needed change.”

Anne O’Connor, Vice President of Legal Affairs, National Institute of Family and Life Advocates

“The Story of Abortion in America is a big story, a momentous story, that extends to the most consequential of human experiences. The story of the past three hundred and seventy years, told here so clearly and deeply sourced, is largely a tragedy; it is up to us to determine what the rest of the story will be.”

Frederica Mathewes-Green, speaker; author, Real Choices: Listening to Women, Looking for Alternatives to Abortion

The Story of Abortion in America

The Story of Abortion in America

A Street-Level History, 1652–2022

Marvin Olaskyand Leah Savas

Foreword by Robert P. George

The Story of Abortion in America: A Street-Level History, 1652–2022

Copyright © 2023 by Marvin Olasky and Leah Savas

Published by Crossway 1300 Crescent Street Wheaton, Illinois 60187

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher, except as provided for by USA copyright law. Crossway® is a registered trademark in the United States of America.

Cover design: Jordan Singer

Cover image: “Five Points, 1827,” New York Public Library Digital Collections. image id: nypl_grd_415.

First printing 2023

Printed in the United States of America

Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture quotations are from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved. The ESV text may not be quoted in any publication made available to the public by a Creative Commons license. The ESV may not be translated into any other language.

Scripture quotations marked NIV are taken from the Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.™ Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved worldwide. www.zondervan.com. The “NIV” and “New International Version” are trademarks registered in the United States Patent and Trademark Office by Biblica, Inc.™

Scripture quotations marked KJV are from the King James Version of the Bible. Public domain.

Hardcover ISBN: 978-1-4335-8044-4 ePub ISBN: 978-1-4335-8047-5 PDF ISBN: 978-1-4335-8045-1 Mobipocket ISBN: 978-1-4335-8046-8

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Olasky, Marvin N., author. | Savas, Leah, 1995- author.

Title: The story of abortion in America : a street-level history, 1652-2022 / Marvin Olasky, Leah Savas.

Description: Wheaton, Illinois : Crossway, [2023] | Includes bibliographical references and index.

Identifiers: LCCN 2022016677 (print) | LCCN 2022016678 (ebook) | ISBN 9781433580444 (hardcover) | ISBN 9781433580451 (pdf) | ISBN 9781433580468 (mobi) | ISBN 9781433580475 (epub)

Subjects: LCSH: Abortion—United States—History. | Abortion—Moral and ethical aspects—United States. | Abortion—Religious aspects—Christianity.

Classification: LCC HQ767.5.U5 O44 2023 (print) | LCC HQ767.5.U5 (ebook) | DDC 363.4/6/0973—dc23/eng/20220414

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022016677

LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022016678

Crossway is a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers.

2023-01-05 04:18:57 PM

For Susan Olasky, founder of the Austin Crisis Pregnancy Center, with thanks for 46 years of marriage, and for CareNet president Guy Condon, who died in 2000 driving home from a pro-life event when a van broadsided his 1990 Honda. Guy, see you again, sometime.

For Stephen Savas, Leah’s encourager, and for faithful readers Bonnie Hickman and Janice Main, both young mothers around the time of Roe v. Wade. Thanks for choosing life and for being my Grandmas.

Contents

Foreword by Robert P. George

Introduction: The Life or Death of Innocent Life

1  Street Level vs. Suite Level

SECTION ONE: Unsafe, Illegal, and Rare, 1652–1842

2  Common Law, Common Sense

3  Murder of a Man Child

4  Pressuring the Father

5  Bitter Execrations

6  An Oath for Midwives

7  Double Robbery of Life

8  A Fallen Pro-Life Founder

9  Laws and Scofflaws

10  Insufficient Protection for Women

SECTION TWO: Specialization Begins, 1838–1878

11  A Fatal Needle

12  The Welfare of Two Patients

13  Madame Restell

14  An Unstoppable Force?

15  A Moral Maelstrom

16  The Unwelcome Child

17  Doctors Push Back

18  Massacres

19  Compassion vs. Abortion

20  Thugs of Society

SECTION THREE: Supply and Demand, 1871–1940

21  A Much Pulverized Reporter

22  The Victims Are . . .

23  So Much Rascality

24  Horror Stories at Century’s End

25  Medical Heroines

26  The Erring Women’s Refuge

27  Weak-Kneed Enforcement

28  Old-School Abortionists

29  Twentieth-Century Compassion

30  Million-Dollar Hands

SECTION FOUR: seeing life, 1930–1995

31  Linkages

32  Complicated Lives

33  Losing the Baby

34  Playing the Danger Card

35  The Father of Abortion Rights

36  Eroded Ethic

37  On the Disassembly Line

38  Pro-Life Frustration

39  Pictures Seen and Unseen

40  Cacophony and Compassion

SECTION FIVE: Still Unsettled, 1995–2022

41  Window to the Womb

42  Loving Your Unborn Neighbor

43  Sensational Facts

44  A Sanitized Image

45  Aborting Alone

46  Incremental vs. Radical

47  The Abortion-Industrial Complex

48  A New Enforcement Mechanism

49  Their One Person

50  Egregiously Wrong

Epilogue 

Bibliography

  Books 445

  Selected Journal and Magazine Articles 461

Other Books by Marvin Olasky

General Index

Scripture Index

Foreword

Marvin Olasky and Leah Savas tell the story of abortion in America by telling the stories of abortion in America.

These are the stories of people who have over the past 370 years sought abortions; performed abortions—lawfully and unlawfully; were pressured or even coerced to have abortions; pressured or coerced mistresses, daughters, domestic servants, or other women to have abortions; worked to prohibit abortion or strengthen existing prohibitions of abortion; enforced the laws against abortion; sought to circumvent abortion laws, or weaken or overturn them in legislatures and courts; changed their minds about abortion—in one direction or the other; provided alternatives to abortion; made small livings or vast sums of money from abortion; and others.

Olasky and Savas thus provide what they describe, aptly in my view, as a “street-level history” of abortion, in contrast with the formal, academic, and often rather abstract historical (or other) treatments of the subject with which all of us today are more than familiar.

The Story of Abortion in America, then, is the story of abortion as seen through the eyes of a pair of smart, well-informed, independent-minded, truth-seeking journalists—writers who bring to life the flesh-and-blood human beings who made the history. They try sympathetically, and remarkably successfully, to understand not only what these people thought, said, and did, but why they thought, said, and did it. The authors adopt what the great academic philosopher of law and social science H. L. A. Hart called “the internal point of view”—that is, the perspective of the actors whose behaviors constitute the phenomena they seek to understand and explain.

The success of the volume that you, the reader, hold in your hands does not mean that the work of professional historians and social sciences is irrelevant or unnecessary. Nor do Olasky and Savas claim that it does such a thing. Indeed, in certain important respects Olasky and Savas draw and rely on “suite-level” scholarship for their “street-level” work. But their contribution adds something missing in more formal scholarship—it is not simply the “dumbed-down” version of academic historiography. Indeed, just as Olasky and Savas draw on the work of “suite-level” scholars, I predict that such scholars writing on abortion over the next few decades will draw on their “street-level” history.

Olasky and Savas have a point of view—a moral and political perspective—and they do not try to hide it. They are pro-life, as I myself am. And they recognize that their moral convictions on the question of the sanctity of all human life, including the lives of children in the womb, influence certain of their understandings and judgments even when it comes to the description of historical facts. Admirably, however, they avoid allowing their accounts of the facts to degenerate into propaganda. To the extent possible, they let the facts speak for themselves. Acknowledging, as we all should, that there is not, and can never be, strictly “value free” or “value neutral” historiography or social science, Olasky and Savas at the same time recognize the obligations of the historian or social scientist to provide as refined and accurate an account as possible, uncolored to the extent possible by judgments of value, or personal or political morality, on which reasonable people can and do disagree.

As a result, The Story of Abortion in America is a book for everyone, and not just a book for people who share the authors’ moral convictions on abortion and the sanctity of life. It can and no doubt will be read with profit by people whose moral convictions are quite distant on these matters from those of the authors. And it can and will certainly be read with profit by the many people, in America and beyond, who experience ambivalence on the question of abortion and/or who do not fit neatly into one category or the other when asked, “Are you pro-life or pro-choice?”

One thing is certain. If we are to think well about the question of abortion—and America’s future when it comes to the question—we need a sound understanding of the history of abortion in America. Supplementing the good work that has been done on the topic by some suite-level historians (alongside, I regret to say, notoriously shoddy work done by some others), Olasky and Savas’s “street-level” story of abortion contributes substantially to meeting that need.

Robert P. George

McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions

Princeton University

Introduction

The Life or Death of Innocent Life

Leah Savas and I wrote this book in anticipation of the 50th anniversary of Roe v. Wade on January 22, 2023. Crossway scheduled it for January 3 publication with that date in mind. The 50th anniversary now is likely to be a day of pro-life appreciation rather than lament, and the opposite for abortion supporters.

Roe reversal made the timing of this book moot but increased the need for historical understanding. From 1973 to 2022 pro-life laws could only trim the edges of a beard or the tips of a ponytail. Now legislators can decree a full shave or even a bald head, but will street-level conduct reflect the new judicial reality?

For 370 years, this book shows, laws and their enforcement have depended on public opinion. As Abraham Lincoln said in 1858, “In this country, public sentiment is everything. With it, nothing can fail; against it, nothing can succeed. Whoever molds public sentiment goes deeper than he who enacts statutes, or pronounces judicial decisions.”1

This book reports on shifting public sentiment over the centuries, and the sentiment in crucial subsets: journalists, pastors, doctors, and others. We also look at records of private opinion, since the views of a woman and her boyfriend or husband are still more influential than any law.

The Supreme Court majority in the crucial case, Dobbs v. Jackson, gave two main reasons for its decision: a re-analysis of the Fourteenth Amendment, and a re-reading of American history.2

I’ll look at the Fourteenth Amendment issue in chapter 18, but the central question for this book is what Justice Samuel Alito asked, quoting a unanimous Supreme Court opinion from 25 years before: Is a right not mentioned in the Constitution “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition”?3

Some thought the answer was an obvious “yes,” since in the 1990 lead-up to the Court’s Casey decision, numerous American historians in an Amicus Curiae brief had said so.4 And yet, few of those historians had themselves delved into abortion history: I saw in twenty-five years as a professor at The University of Texas at Austin how social pressures influence judgment.

Alito, in his Dobbs majority opinion, after disposing of the Fourteenth Amendment contentions, offered fourteen pages of legal history and noted that “Roe either ignored or misstated this history. . . . It is therefore important to set the record straight.”5

He concluded, “a right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and traditions. On the contrary, an unbroken tradition of prohibiting abortion on pain of criminal punishment persisted from the earliest days of the common law until 1973.”6 That’s true about the common law that judges and prosecutors applied, but what about common practice outside the courtroom?

National Public Radio in June 2022 stated this as fact about abortion: “In colonial America, it was considered a fairly common practice, a private decision made by women and aided mostly by midwives.”7 True? Other common generalizations: In the nineteenth century, abortion laws were a way for men to put midwives out of business. True? In the twentieth century, coat-hanger and Lysol abortions were frequent. Are those and many other assumptions about the history of abortion true? That’s what this book attempts to assess.

Justice Alito dealt with legal history rather than social history, as is proper for a justice, but we should recognize that law is the 10 percent of an iceberg visible from a cruise ship: This book reveals the 90 percent below the ocean’s surface. Throughout, Leah and I pay particular attention to what makes this issue different from others the Supreme Court has faced: Abortion is about both the life or death of innocent life and the liberty of young women and men.

The fictional Sherlock Holmes solved a case because a dog did not bark. The 66-page dissent in Dobbs was well-written but it skipped one supremely vital matter: Is the creature in the womb human life?8That question underlies this book, which makes it unusual among books about abortion history. It’s also an unusual book in three other ways.

First, it lays out the history of abortion in America not at “suite level,” as a law journal might, but at street level, where human beings make life-or-death decisions.

What difference does that make? A 1976 New York Times column by Linda Bird Francke contrasted her abstract thinking during a pro-choice march with her “panic,” moments before she was about to abort: “Suddenly the rhetoric, the abortion marches I’d walked in . . . peeled away, and I was all alone with my microscopic baby.”9

That’s the existential moment. Francke’s tale ended poignantly: “It certainly does make more sense not to be having a baby right now. . . . But I have this ghost now. A very little ghost that only appears when I’m seeing something beautiful, like the full moon on the ocean last weekend. And the baby waves at me. And I wave back at the baby.”

Second, this book favors neither a “Shout Your Abortion” nor a “Shun the Aborting Woman” approach. Abortion is a tragedy that often produces grief, as one recent book of poems about abortion shows. Publicists for Choice Words say it will “renew our courage in the struggle to defend reproductive rights.”10 Maybe so, but the bones cry out.

The collection includes the 1945 poem “The Mother,” by Gwendolyn Brooks, the first African American to win a Pulitzer Prize for poetry. Brooks wrote that abortions “will not let you forget.” She described how she has “heard in the voices of the wind the voices of my dim killed children.”11

Two generations later, Teri Ellen Cross Davis told her aborted child, “science tells me / inside my bones / you are still whispering.”12 Many writings regarded as pro-choice reveal pro-life yearnings, and that’s one reason partisan books and out-of-context binary polling—“Are you pro-life or pro-choice?”—often oversimplify the issues.

Third, the authors bring to this work diverse experiences. I’m a 72-year-old man who’s been through the abortion wars for nearly four decades. Leah reverses my age: She’s 27 and has covered World magazine’s life beat for four years. We each use “I” at times, so you should know that I wrote the first forty chapters, Leah the last ten.

Throughout, we’ll look at five considerations affecting views of abortion:

Anatomy: Does that creature in the womb have human characteristics?

Bible: Is its teaching on the sacredness of human life binding on us?

Community: What kind of advice and support do vulnerable women receive from boyfriends or husbands, parents and friends, employers or government, or anyone to whom a woman might look for emotional or financial help?

Danger to women: What is the likelihood of an abortion ending with not just one victim but two?

Enforcement: In what informal and formal ways do those with influence and resources protect the most vulnerable?

Some readers may be familiar with my book Abortion Rites: A Social History of Abortion in America, which I researched at the Library of Congress in 1990 and ’91: Crossway published it in 1992. My original intent in 2020 was to do a new edition of that work. I quickly learned that many old records and newspaper accounts now available in archives and online throw so much new light on the subject that I needed to write a new book, which Leah’s writing and perspective greatly helped.

Readers of the earlier book will recognize some major characters like John McDowall and Madame Restell, but they’ll make many new acquaintances as well: Jane Sharp and Anne Orthwood, Sarah Grosvenor and Amasa Sessions, Sarah Cornell and Ephraim Avery, Eliza Sowers and Hugh Hodge, James Jaquess and Andrew Nebinger, Cora Sammis and Jennie Clark, Will Myers and Eliza Levassy, C. H. Orton and Kittie O’Toole, Scott Jackson and Pearl Bryan, Mary Hood and Inez Burns, Frederick Taussig and Robert Dickinson, Edgar Keemer and Ruth Barnett, and others who over the centuries infiltrated dreams and nightmares.

Read on, please.

Marvin Olasky

July 4, 2022

1  Abraham Lincoln, Complete Works (New York: Century Company, 1907), 1:422.

2Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 597 U.S. ___ (2022).

3  InWashington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702 (1997), 721, the Supreme Court declared 9-0 that the Fourteenth Amendment does not establish a right to assisted suicide. Chief Justice William Rehnquist’s opinion acknowledged that the Amendment guarantees some rights not mentioned in the Constitution, but they must be “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition,” and assisted suicide is not.

4  “Brief of 281 American Historians as Amici Curiae Supporting Appellees,” The Public Historian 12 (Summer 1990), 57–75. The brief notes, “Numerous additional historians joined the brief after it was filed, bringing the total number to over 400.”

5Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 597 U.S. ___ (2022), 16.

6Dobbs, 25.

7  Sacha Pfeiffer on All Things Considered, June 6, 2022, 4:29 p.m. ET.

8  There is no neutral nomenclature for the creature in the womb. “Fetus” is a medical term that became common in news coverage only in 1962, as chapter 33 will show. Some favor the word “preborn,” which makes sense because “unborn” now sounds like a horror film term, but since “preborn” is not commonly used it draws attention to itself and away from the facts surrounding it. In this book we’ll use the words used throughout most of American history, “unborn child.”

9  Linda Bird Francke, initially writing as “Jane Doe,” “There Just Wasn’t Room in Our Lives Now for Another Baby,” New York Times, May 14, 1976, 21.

10  See Annie Finch, ed., Choice Words: Writers on Abortion (Chicago: Haymarket, 2020).

11  Gwendolyn Brooks, “The Mother,” in A Street in Bronzeville (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1945), here quoted from Finch, Choice Words, 161.

12  Teri Ellen Cross Davis, “Haint,” in Haint (Arlington, VA: Gival Press, 2016), 67, here quoted from Finch, Choice Words, 226; other poems from Choice Words were quoted in World, October 9, 2021, 26; and January 29, 2022, 26.

1

Street Level vs. Suite Level

“Individuals and groups that seek to restrict access to abortion often use sonograms, photos, and plastic models of prenates [unborn children] to play on people’s emotional associations with newborn babies.”1

Journalists for centuries have wrestled with how much attention to pay to the creature in the womb. Here’s a headline at the top of page one of the New York Times on the first day of summer, 1883: “TWENTY-ONE MURDERED BABIES.” The story showed a detective pushing his shovel through basement dirt and finding tiny skulls, ribs, and leg bones: the remnants of 400–500 unborn children killed by Philadelphia abortionist Isaac Hathaway.2

Was it right for the Times to report that, when a district attorney shook the cigar box containing the twenty-one corpses, the bones rattled like “hard withered leaves”? Or how about the specific detail in a Philadelphia newspaper: The bones had “their natural shape.” The pieces included “the outer-line of an eye-socket. . . . remnants of arms and hands, shoulder-blades.”3

Back then a judge exclaimed, “It was murder.” Newspapers across America ran with the story, including its specific detail. In Anderson, South Carolina, The Intelligencer lamented, “A Philadelphia Golgotha.” In St. Louis, the Globe-Democrat screamed, “Philadelphia’s Ghoul . . . The Men Had Hardly Dug Down Six Inches when They Struck THE SKULL OF A BABE.” In Cedar Rapids, Iowa, The Gazette front-paged “A Philadelphia Abortionist Makes a Babies’ Cemetery in His Cellar.” In Mineral Park, Arizona, the Mohave County Miner moaned about “A Ghastly Discovery.”4

And that was not all. In 1883, via the new Associated Press and other press collaboratives, readers across the United States read sensational stories about abortionist Hathaway in colorfully named newspapers like The Public Reaper (Farmer City, IL), the Santa Cruz Surf, The Biblical Recorder (Raleigh, NC), the Vernon County Censor (Viroqua, WI), The True Northerner (Paw Paw, MI), The Opposition (Crete, NE), and The Whisperer (Portis, KS).

These newspapers were small but avidly read. Their cumulative circulation of these stories was immense. I traced the Hathaway coverage in 1883 across one state, Kansas, the geographic center of the contiguous United States, and imagined a salesman on a dirt road taking a break from his labors by reading the local newspaper, then jumping up and down, yelling “baby-butcher!” That’s what headlines—in the Garden City Irrigator, the Morris County Enterprise, The Bronson Pilot, and The Pleasanton Herald—called Hathaway.5

A song popular in the 1960s and still broadcast, “I’ve Been Everywhere,” features a rapid-fire “Reno, Chicago, Fargo . . . Boston, Charleston, Dayton . . . Louisville, Nashville, Knoxville . . . Pittsburgh, Parkersburg, Gravelbourg . . . I’ve been everywhere, man.” Try putting to that tune the 1883 Kansas abortion stories in Wichita, Salina, Topeka, Oneida . . . Leon, Atchison, Holton, Hutchinson . . . Concordia, Emporia, Arcadia . . . Hays City, Mound City, Elk City, Strong City. That’s one state. The message—abortion equals horror—went “everywhere, man.”6

Some reporters and editors spared readers the grisliest detail, but other newspapers piled on. In Illinois, the Monmouth Evening Gazette ran a “BURIED BABIES” headline followed by “Infant Bodies for Dog Meat—A Ghastly Recital.” Readers learned about Hathaway’s “voracious dogs in the cellar. Sometimes when pressed for time he did not go to the trouble of dismembering the bodies of his little victims, but tossed them into the cellar, where they would be quickly devoured.”7

An angry Mrs. Hathaway said her husband sometimes threw the tiny corpses into their cooking-stove, “preparing the dinner from the heat from the human fuel.” She said Hathaway even aborted their own twins and planned to turn them into fuel, but she was “not quite hardened enough to see her own flesh and blood burned before her eyes.” They buried the bodies in their yard.8

The Hathaway arrest in 1883 received more nationwide attention than any other abortion case in the 1880s. As we’ll see, abortions that resulted in the deaths of a mother and a tiny victim received broad attention in 1890, 1893, 1896, 1907, 1910, and other years, but the next discovery of numerous corpses in one place did not come until ninety-nine years after the discovery in Hathaway’s basement.

That’s when the owner of a Los Angeles pathology lab failed to make payments on a container in which he had stored 16,500 dead unborn children. Workers emptying the container on Thursday, February 4, 1982, discovered the bodies packed in formaldehyde-filled jars stuffed into boxes stacked eight feet high.

Two days later, the Los Angeles Times ran on page 27 a headline, “500 Fetuses Found in Metal Container,” and reported that “health and safety code violations may be involved.” Times reporter Judith Michaelson included in her story the reaction of forklift operator Ron Gillett: “I saw one fetus with legs 2½–3 inches long, and the body and head were demolished. I was scared, frightened, and had tears in my eyes.”9

Was it right that the Los Angeles Times and its news service on subsequent days avoided any further description and went up the “ladder of abstraction”? Headlines emphasized the detective aspects: “LA County Tries to Unravel Fetus Mystery,” “LA Officials Studying 500 Fetuses to Check whether Crime Occurred,” and (on page 54) “Secret Meeting Set in Fetus Discovery Case.”10

An Associated Press story on February 6—“500 Fetuses Found in Huge Metal Container”—made its way onto page 26 of the Tacoma News Tribune and received similar placement in newspapers such as the Clarion Ledger in Mississippi and the St. Cloud Times in Minnesota. AP stories on subsequent days ran under headlines like those in the Los Angeles Times: “Fetuses Are Probed for Abortion Status,” “Fetuses to Be Examined,” “Fetuses under Guard during Disposal Probe,” “Probe Continues in LA Fetus Case,” and “Fetus Disposal Probe Continues.”11

The stories could have been different, as they were in one small newspaper. The News-Pilot of San Pedro, California, close to the disposal site, ran its story at the top of page one. Staff writer Rex Dalton, unlike his counterparts in 1883, used the word “fetus,” but he humanized the “hundreds of fetuses, some more than five months developed, with expressions on their faces. . . . They varied in development from a few weeks to more than five months, officials said. Larger fetuses—some weighing more than 3 pounds—were in 1-gallon, ice cream-type containers, while smaller ones were in jars marked ‘dentures.’”12

Dalton also quoted Nick Martin, owner of the company that repossessed the container: Martin believed that “abortion is wrong. Anybody seeing what is in that container would, too.” But other reporters did not give readers specific detail about what was in the container. Hank Stolk, one of the truck drivers who repossessed the corpse-filled container, later told the author of a pro-life book about the discovery, “We kept trying to get the reporters to talk about . . . these babies that were killed. But they wouldn’t listen or ask any questions about that.”13

In mid-February Nick Thimmesch, a columnist syndicated by the Los Angeles Times, wrote about “the ghastly container” and criticized the way some officials and reporters referred to its contents as “medical waste”: Thimmesch asked, “But what is medical waste? An amputated leg, a cancerous growth, an unborn child?” The Times itself, though, did not run that column, and it apparently appeared only in small newspapers. By the end of February the story seemed dead.14

The story had a brief revival late in May, when headlines such as “Caskets Ready for 40 of the 17,000 Aborted Fetuses” appeared, and President Ronald Reagan endorsed the desire of pro-life advocates to have a burial service for them. The Central New Jersey Home News quoted Hank Stolk’s description of what he saw back in February: “a leg with a little foot on it . . . a hand and part of an arm.”15 But larger newspapers ran neither descriptions nor photographs, and the Los Angeles Times quoted abortion advocate Gloria Allred’s contention that showing photos of the dead was “a sleazy, callous, and cheap political trick at the expense of women who have already suffered enough.”16

That put the issue well. Was reporting at street level cruel, and an indication of bias? Did abortion advocates have to stay at suite level and push an abstract term: pro-choice?

Not necessarily. Magda Denes was a 42-year-old Holocaust survivor in 1976 when her extraordinary In Necessity and Sorrow hit the bookstores. She classified herself as “pro-choice” and apparently remained so until her death 20 years later, but she researched her book for months inside a New York City abortion center because she hated “the evasions, multifaceted, clever, and shameful, by which we all live and die.”17

Here’s one description of how she did not run from reality: “I look inside the bucket in front of me. There is a small naked person in there floating in a bloody liquid—plainly the tragic victim of a drowning accident. But then perhaps this was no accident, because the body is purple with bruises. . . . I lift the fetuses, one by one. I lift them by an arm or leg. . . . I carry on the examination, whose sole purpose by now is to increase the unbearable anguish in my heart.”18

Denes, in the course of her research, got to know the abortionists (and protected them by changing their names). One said, “You can feel the fetus wiggling at the end of that needle and moving around, which is an unpleasant thing.” The director of nursing said her nurses “feel a little repulsed when you get a big fetus. It is very traumatic for the staff to pick this up and put it in a container and say, ‘Okay, that’s going to the incinerator.’”19

Furthermore, Denes empathized with women waiting for abortions: “Their pinched faces are full of determination and terror. Big-eyed, bird-like, pale, hawk-handed in fright, they seem like lost souls before the final judgment.” Denes said one patient’s “drained face is indistinguishable from the white sheet on which she lies.” Denes portrayed women coming out of anesthesia and asking, “Has it been done?” A nurse answered, “It is finished.”20

1  Rebecca Peters, Trust Women: A Progressive Christian Argument for Reproductive Justice (Boston: Beacon, 2018), 42. Peters worries that “a prenate looks like a baby long before it is viable, and our improved technological capacity in the last thirty years has brought prenatal images increasingly into our consciousness.”

2New York Times, June 21, 1883, 1.

3New York Times, June 24 and 28, 1883, 1; Philadelphia Times, June 28, 1; June 24, 3. See also Chester Times, June 21, 4, and June 28, 4; Philadelphia Inquirer, June 21, 2, and June 28, 3; Oil City Derrick, June 28, 3; Lancaster Daily Intelligencer, June 21, 2, and June 23, 3.

4Globe-Democrat, June 21, 1883, 6; Gazette, June 21, 1, and June 22, 1; Intelligencer, June 28, 2; Miner, July 1, 1. See also San Francisco Chronicle, June 21, 3.

5Garden City (KS) Irrigator; Morris County Enterprise (Parkerville, KS); Bronson Pilot: all June 28, 1883, 1; Pleasonton (KS) Herald, June 29, 1.

6  As reported (in chronological order, June and July, 1883), in (JUNE 21) Atchison Daily Patriot, 1; The Daily Commonwealth (Topeka), 1; Emporia Weekly Republican, 1; The Evening News (Emporia), 3; Leavenworth Times, 1; Topeka Daily Capital, 1; (JUNE 22) The Ottawa Daily Republic, 1; The Parsons Daily Sun, 1; (JUNE 27) The Elk City Globe, 3; Kansas People (Osage), 2; (JUNE 28) The Belleville Telescope, 1; The Blue Rapids Times, 4; Cedarville Telephone, 4; Chanute Weekly Times, 4; Chase County Leader (Cottonwood Falls), 4; Clyde Herald, 2; The Great Bend Register, 4; The Hays City Sentinel, 3; Hepler Leader, 1; The Junction City Tribune, 4; The Kansas Jewelite (Mankato), 3; The Kinsley Graphic, 4; Leon Indicator, 1; Oberlin Herald, 4; Osborne County News, 2; Pratt County Press (Iuka), 4; The Semi-Weekly Republican, 2; The Weekly Herald (Fort Scott), 1; The Western Herald (Girard), 1; Wichita New Republic, 2; (JUNE 29) The Cherokee Sentinel, 4; The Douglass Index, 2; Erie Record, 2; Garnet Republican Plaindealer, 3; Greenwood County Republican (Eureka), 3; The Hanover Democrat and Enterprise, 1; The Lindsborg News-Record, 4; Linn County Clarion (Mound City), 1; Neodesha Free Press, 1; The Sedgwick Pantagraph, 4; Washington Weekly Post, 4; The Whiting Weekly News, 1; The Wilson County Citizen (Fredonia), 1; (JUNE 30) The Danville Courant, 6; The McCune Times, 4; The Oneida Chieftain, 2; The Salina Semi-Weekly Journal, 2; Western Kansas World (Wakeeny), 3; The Wetmore Spectator, 1; (JULY 3) The Dodge City Globe, 1; (JULY 4) Alma News, 1; Ellsworth Messenger, 2; Harper County Times, 6; Holton Signal, 2; The Independence Kansan, 1; (JULY 5) The Alliance Herald (Stafford), 2; The Alton Empire, 2; Anthony Journal, 6; The Arcadia Reporter, 1; The Beloit Courier, 2; Burden Saturday Journal, 1; Cawker City Public Record, 2; Chetopa Advance, 2; Colony Free Press, 1; Greenwood County Democrat (Eureka), 1; Harper Sentinel, 2; Kansas Reporter (Warnego), 2; The Kirwin Kansan, 2; The Onaga Democrat, 1; Topeka Mail, 6; The Valley Falls New Era, 2; The Wellsville News, 1; Westmoreland Recorder, 6; Yates Center Argus, 6; (JULY 6) Barber County Index (Medicine Lodge), 2; Cherryvale Globe and Torch, 6; The Courier Tribune (Seneca), 1; Delphos Carrier, 1; The Frankfort Bee, 2; Greenleaf Independent, 1; The Grenola Hornet, 6; The Iola Register, 1; Kansas Kritic (Concordia), 3; Labette County Democrat, 2; The Lawrence Tribune, 2; Strong City Independent, 1; (JULY 7) The Cresset (Clay Center), 3; Hutchinson Herald, 1; The Sun (Glasco), 2.

7New York Times, June 21, 1; Monmouth (IL) Evening Gazette, June 21, 2. See also June 21 issues of Sturgeon Bay (WI) Weekly Expositor Independent, 4; Janesville (WI) Daily Gazette, 2; Middletown (NY) Daily Argus, 2; Norwalk (OH) Daily Reflector, 2 (all 1883).

8The Ogden Standard, June 29, 1883, 2; Montgomery Advertiser, June 26, 1883, 3. Hathaway himself received vivid description: The New York Times, June 24, 1883, 1, called him “a shabby-looking old man, stooping and weak, attired in a very dirty shirt, and with hair and voluminous beard dyed in raven black.”

9  Michaelson, on February 6, 1982, also quoted Gillett’s boss, Nick Martin, saying “They’re just fetuses, but they sure look like bodies to me.” A United Press International story the next day ran the same quotation from Martin but included two words at the beginning that gave Martin’s words a different twist: “They say they’re just fetuses, but they sure look like humans to me” (Pacific Daily News [Guam], February 7, 9; italics added).

10Honolulu Advertiser, February 7, 1982, 15; Miami Herald, February 8, 145; Los Angeles Times, February 11, 54. Linguist S. I. Hayakawa developed the “ladder of abstraction” concept in his 1939 book Language in Thought and Action. The bottom rung is concrete detail, and every rung higher is more abstract.

11  The initial AP story on February 6, 1982, included a quotation from Mel Grussing of the California Department of Health saying of the workers, “They noticed a foul odor, and what looked to them to be body parts.” Further AP stories—Fresno Bee, February 7, 16; Alabama Journal, February 8, 20; Burlington Free Press, February 9, 4; “Probe Continues in LA Fetus Case,” Santa Monica Times, February 11, 18; Santa Cruz Sentinel, February 17, 33—did not include even that small amount of specific detail.

12  Dalton, “Fetuses Found in Wilmington Container,” News-Pilot, February 6, 1982, 1.

13  Hank Stolk, quoted in S. Rickly Christian, The Woodland Hills Tragedy (Westchester, IL: Crossway, 1985), 76.

14  Nick Thimmesch, “A Ghastly Backyard Scene,” Victoria (TX) Advocate, February 16, 4; and Carlsbad (NM) Current-Argus, February 22, 16; “Life and Death in Woodland Hills,” The Desert Sun (Palm Springs), February 23, 14.

15  Headline and quotation from Central (New Brunswick) New Jersey Home News, May 28, 11.

16  Marita Hernandez, “Allred Calls for Probe in Fetus Pictures,” Los Angeles Times, June 8, 34.

17  Magda Denes, In Necessity and Sorrow: Life and Death in an Abortion Hospital (New York: Basic Books, 1976), xv, xvi.

18  Denes, In Necessity and Sorrow, 60–61.

19  Denes, In Necessity and Sorrow, 141, 144, 154. Denes on 67 quotes one doctor saying, “You have to become a bit schizophrenic. In one room you encourage the patient that the slight irregularity of the fetal heart is not important, everything is going well, she is going to have a nice baby, and then you shut the door and go into the next room and assure another patient on whom you just did a saline abortion, that it’s fine if the heart is already irregular, she has nothing to worry about, she is not going to have a live baby.”

20  Denes, In Necessity and Sorrow, 136. Denes does not state the Christian reference (Gospel of John 19:30), but says of the patients, “It hardly matters into which eyes I look, which face becomes focal. Only the convent of calvary differs; the stations of the cross remain the same: bewilderment, guilt, helplessness, recurrence, blame, astonishment, shame, and grieving, grieving, grieving” (91).

Section One

Unsafe, Illegal, and RarE

1652–1842

Chapters 2–10 take us from early abortions in Maryland to the early nineteenth century. Knowledge of fetal anatomy was low, but biblical belief and community protection left abortion unsafe, illegal, and rare. While historians still debate what the common law said, juries and midwives tried to offer common sense and sometimes common wisdom.

2

Common Law, Common Sense

Captain William Mitchell, born in Sussex in 1605 or 1615 (records vary), had a mid-life crisis at mid-century. England’s civil war was over: What to do next? Married for eleven years, with one son, he met comely Susan Warren, 21, and said he wanted to marry her. Oh, one inconvenient fact: She, like Mitchell, was already married. Mitchell said she should voyage to America with him.1

At this point let’s pause for a public service announcement regarding Maryland, where (to quote one typical come-on) “peas grow ten inches long in ten days” and turkeys “whose flesh is very pleasant and sweet” waddle around for the taking. That sounded heavenly, especially when compared to smelly London, where Warren washed clothes in the Thames as men butchered animals and threw offal into the river. London was also a disease center, and America’s wide-open spaces were more healthy, weren’t they?2

Mitchell did not mention “seasoning,” the exposure to malaria and various Maryland or Virginia germs that killed about half of all servants within five years. He did not say that 30 percent of infants died in their first year, and almost half of all inhabitants by age twenty.3 But Warren’s husband had heard such talk. He did not want to spend seven weeks in a crowded ship tossed by waves, only to discover the downside on the other side of the Atlantic. So Susan Warren then showed extraordinary independence by deciding to head west without her husband.

She was one of 22 “artificers, workmen, and other useful persons” who embarked with Captain and Mrs. Mitchell. Mitchell had arranged the expedition after Cecilius Calvert of Maryland’s founding family offered him 100 acres of Maryland farmland for every person Mitchell paid for. Plus, in Maryland, Mitchell could become a member of the Governor’s Council. Plus, Mitchell’s wife conveniently died in the middle of the Atlantic, a fact one prosecutor later found suspicious: He said Mitchell “is much Suspected (if not known) to have brought his late wife to an untimely end.”4

Warren soon developed her own suspicions. Mitchell did not rely on his charms to get her into bed with him. Instead, he claimed she owed him money, probably for the passage to Maryland. He forced her to sign a document stating she would be his servant until she had sweated enough to pay him back. After arrival in Maryland, they lay “in naked bed together” at a colonial inn. Warren became pregnant. Mitchell at first seemed sympathetic to her plight: “She had Suffered much disgrace for his Sake, and now if She pleased he would make her amends.” Then he reneged and refused to marry her. She referred to the Bible and said that he, as a Christian gentleman, should make things right. Mitchell laughed it off: Jesus and the Holy Spirit, he said, are only “a man and a pigeon.”5

Mitchell mixed an abortifacient—a potion that could kill the unborn child—with a poached egg and forced Warren to eat it: “He said if she would not take it he would thrust it down her throat, so she being in bed could not withstand it.” The potion apparently killed the child and caused Warren to lose much of her hair. Her skin erupted into “boils and blains.” Mitchell taunted her: “How now hath your God helped you? Ah thou may’st well believe anything that is told you, such a thing as God. . . . O thou art a fool.”6

A bit of backstory: This was not the first abortion in American history. Before Europeans arrived, Native Americans knew about—and sometimes used—abortifacient plants and other substances. Tribes as varied as the Lenape, Cree, Mohegan, Sioux, Ojibwe, and Chippewa knew of sweet flag, tansy, pennyroyal, and blue cohosh.7As Thomas Jefferson later noted, Native American women often accompanied “men in their parties of war and of hunting. Childbearing becomes extremely inconvenient to them. It is said, therefore, that they have learnt the practice of procuring abortion by the use of some vegetable.”8

Nor was Susan Warren’s misery the first of its kind among the colonists. One story tucked into the minutes of the Council and General Court of Colonial Virginia may be America’s first written-down abortion saga. In 1629, servant Dorcas Howard told her master, George Orwin, I’m sick and cannot work. He suspected she might be pregnant and threatened to beat her. She confessed and told her master the name of the baby’s father. He ordered Howard to bed and called “some women to her.”

We don’t know what those women did, but the next morning the corpse of an unborn child was on the floor. One woman, Elizabeth Moorecocke, testified that the child, a boy, was stillborn with a bruised head. We don’t know what happened next. That case record and others vanished when Confederate troops burned Virginia’s court building on the night of April 2, 1865, as they escaped from Richmond. The fire left us only with tantalizing hints of other abortion tragedies, including a case brought by Thomas Evens, who claimed another woman caused his wife to miscarry.9

So, Mitchell’s case at a Provincial Court sitting in 1652 is the first abortion for which we have solid records. Mitchell thought his political prominence would protect him—but as the story of his words and behavior spread throughout Maryland, the royal authorities responded. As a prosecutor put it, Mitchell’s appointment to the Governor’s Council did not allow him to do whatever he pleased: His prominence made his unethical behavior worse because he ought “to have given good example to others.”10

The prosecutor added that Mitchell’s talent, bestowed by God, “should be used to His glory and the publick good.” And yet, Mitchell tried “to color over his Villainous Courses, and to mock and deride all Religion and Civil Government.” Mitchell tried “to draw others to believe there is no God, making a Common practice by blasphemous expressions and otherwise to mock and deride God’s Ordinances, and all Religion.” He also plotted “to destroy or Murther the Child by him begotten in the Womb of the Said Susan Warren.”11

Since Warren was the key witness against Mitchell, the defense called witnesses to raise questions about her honesty. One witness, Mary Clocker, quoted Warren denying her pregnancy and saying, “If She were with Child it was inspired by the holy Ghost, and not by man.” Another witness, Richard Hoskins, quoted Warren saying, “She would damn her Soul but She would be revenged of that Rogue Mitchell.”12

The messy court record included other charges and nuances, but Mitchell’s defense was straightforward: He was innocent unless proven guilty of “Murder Atheism and Blasphemy.” His case showed the tensions that would influence abortion law and prosecutions in centuries to come. How could a prosecutor prove that an abortifacient or abortionist killed an unborn child? How could a prosecutor know the unborn baby was even alive in the womb? Maybe the child died of other causes. Maybe no pregnancy ever existed. Should an abortion attempt be a crime, regardless of the results?

After all, until quickening—the time after about four months of pregnancy when a woman feels the child moving within her—no one in those days could prove whether a woman was pregnant. One midwife noted that “Diverse Physicians have laid down rules whereby to know when a woman hath conceived with Child,” but in a list of fourteen, only one piece of evidence was 90 percent accurate: “Her monthly terms stop at some unreasonable time.”13

In the absence of pregnancy tests, midwives and others offered uncertain signs of pregnancy like this one: “Her stomach becomes very weak, she hath no desire to eat her meat, but is troubled with sower belchings.” Or, her desire for sexual relations was evidence of conception: “The pleasure she takes at this time is extraordinary.” Some pointed to a pregnant woman’s desire for unusual foods.14

We can’t read the minds of the Marylanders deciding Mitchell’s case, but the evidence for a murder charge was clearly insufficient. Abortion trials for centuries hinged on whether prosecutors could prove pregnancy. The opinion in the 1348 Abortionist’s Case in England states regarding the accused, “It is difficult to know whether he killed the child or not.” Juries then and now choose not between guilt and innocence, but guilty or not-proven-guilty—and sometimes they seek a compromise.15

The legal determinant, theoretically, was English “common law,” the cases decided over the centuries. Justice Harry Blackmun in his 1973 Roe v. Wade decision asserted that English “common law” accepted abortion. He relied on, and repeatedly cited as authoritative, two law journal articles by Cyril Means Jr., who happened to be the top lawyer of the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws. Surprise! Means cited two English cases but left out numerous others that undermined his contention about abortion’s acceptance.

The two cases Means cited are not clear-cut, but even if they were, here are two others. In 1290 a pregnant woman, Alice, slammed a door on “John the Scot,” who was chasing her husband, Roger the Spicer. Then came injury: John pushed the door so hard that Alice fell and was severely injured. The twins Alice carried both died. John the Scot ran. The court declared him an “outlaw,” a word in those days taken literally: John the Scot was outside legal protection, and anyone who saw him could kill him.16

And one from 1530: William Wodlake, “by the instigation of the devil, knowing that a certain Katherine Alaund was pregnant with a child, with dissembling words gave the same Katherine to drink a certain drink in order to destroy the child then being in the said Katherine’s body. . . . Katherine was afterwards delivered of that child dead: so that the same William Wodlake feloniously killed and murdered the child with the drink in manner and form aforesaid, against the peace of the lord king.” Wodlake escaped punishment by dying in 1531.17

In any event, it’s unlikely that members of the Provincial Court trying Captain Mitchell had any expertise in the common law concerning abortion. What they did have was common sense. On August 26, 1652, the Council kicked Mitchell off for “scandalous behavior” and banned him from holding any public office in the colony ever again. In a society that emphasized honor and reputation, that was a big hit.

Mitchell also had a pocketbook penalty: The Council freed Warren from whatever service Mitchell said she owed him. The Council gave Mitchell a choice: Take a public, physical whipping to back up the verbal whipping, or pay a fine of 5,000 pounds of tobacco. That’s what a worker typically took 3 1/3 years to earn. Mitchell paid up. He received a further warning: Any other poor behavior would cost him even more.18

Warren, with no money to pay a fine for fornication, may have received a whipping, although neighbors interceded on her behalf and her final penalty was not recorded. She also received an allowance from Mitchell’s wealth and became a free woman. Susan Warren summed up her thoughts about the relation of extramarital pregnancy and abortion: “It was a great Sin to get it, but a greater to make it away.”19

1  “Capt. William Mitchell,” at Geni.com.

2  George Alsop, “A Character of the Province of Maryland” in Maryland State Archives, https://msa.maryland.gov/megafile/msa/library/014300/014309/html/alsop-0001.html.

3  On disease in colonial America, see John Ruston Pagan, Anne Orthwood’s Bastard: Sex and Law in Early Virginia (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003), 15–16.

4Archives of Maryland (Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society, 1936), III, 151, and CCCCXXVI, 599.

5Archives of Maryland, X, 149, 183, and 176.

6Archives of Maryland, X, 173. Warren’s testimony includes a statement of her own faith: “That when she hath been sick calling on God to help her, Captain Mitchell hath replied, ‘What was that which I called God, Did I know him, had I ever any conference with him. I said not of his person, but by his works, I was confident that I should have help.’”

7  Daniel Moerman, Native American Ethnobotany (Portland, OR: Timber, 1998), 46–48, 782–801; Virgil J. Vogel, American Indian Medicine (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1970), 244.

8  Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, quoted in Paul Leicester Ford, ed., The Works of Thomas Jefferson, Federal Edition, 12 vols. (New York and London: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1904–1905), vol. 3.

9  H. R. McIlwaine, ed., Minutes of the Council and General Court (Richmond: Virginia State Library Board, 1924), 194 (April 8, 1629). See also the Virginia Historical Magazine, XXXI (1923), 210–11, and County Court Records of Accomack-Northampton, Virginia, 1632–1640: 1, 43.

10Archives of Maryland, X, 183.

11Archives of Maryland, X, 183. The prosecutor said Mitchell’s actions were a natural result of his beliefs: He made “a Common practice by blasphemous expressions and otherwise to mock and deride God’s Ordinances and all Religion, thereby to open a way to all wicked lustfull licentious and profane Courses.”

12Archives of Maryland, X, 149, 181.

13  Jane Sharp, The Midwives Book, or The Whole Art of Midwifry Discovered (1671; repr., New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 82–83. Menstrual delays and irregularities can also result from increased exercise, stress, thyroid dysfunction, and other causes.

14  Sharp, Midwives Book, 83.

15  Anthony Fitzherbert, La Grande Abridgement (1516), 268, quoted in Duane L. Ostler, “A Conversation about Abortion between Justice Blackmun and the Founding Fathers,” Constitutional Commentary 167 (2014): 281, at https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/concomm/281.

16  Philip A. Rafferty, Roe v. Wade: Unraveling the Fabric of America (Mustang, OK: Tate, 2012), 140.

17  Rafferty, Roe v. Wade: Unraveling the Fabric of America, 151.

18Archives of Maryland, X, 183–85.

19Archives of Maryland, X, 80, 81, 176.

3

Murder of a Man Child

In a small colony, one life touched another: Maryland’s (and America’s) next celebrated abortion case began with a business deal between landowner Francis Brooke and the disgraced Captain Mitchell. The year after his heavy fine and requirement to support Susan Warren financially, Mitchell downsized his household. Brooke offered two cows for the remaining indenture of Ann Boulton, one of Mitchell’s servants. Mitchell agreed, and the eventual result was the first American court case regarding a pre-quickened child.1

Brooke, like Mitchell, arrived in Maryland in 1650, but he came with his father, mother, and nine younger siblings. The household included at least two female servants. Brooke married Ann Boulton, but court records in the Maryland archives show that wedded bliss did not last. Once, when Ann wanted to wash a pail instead of letting a dog lick it, Brooke broke a cane over her. Another time she roasted veal and was about to eat some, but he hit her so hard with an oak board that it broke in two.2

A third incident occurred in 1656, when Ann was pregnant. She stewed two sheep’s heads and was about to eat one of them. Brooke said no, called her “you whore,” chased her outside, and beat her with a large pair of wooden tongs. At that point a brave neighbor, Elizabeth Claxton, intervened. She said Brooke might kill the unborn child and asked if “he longed to be hanged.” Brooke said he “did not care if she did Miscarry, if She was with Child it was none of his.”3

Brooke forced an abortifacient on Ann. Their unborn child died. Midwife Rose Smith described the corpse: “a man child about three months old and it was all bruised one side of it.” She suggested that Brooke’s beating of Ann caused the death. Neighbor Claxton showed the 3-inch-long corpse to Brooke, accused him of murder, and said he will “dearly answer” for doing evil.

That was no bluff. Smith and Claxton testified at a provincial court trial of Brooke for murder. Justice Harry Blackmun in Roe v. Wade will say abortion prior to quickening was not a crime in English or colonial common law. If that’s true, why a charge of murder upon the death of an unborn baby merely three months after conception?4

Let’s pause to ask what people during the 1600s or 1700s knew about the capacities of unborn children at various ages of gestation. Answer: Not much. Much to the frustration of colonial New York doctor Cadwallader Colden, anatomical knowledge had advanced little during the two millennia since Aristotle (384–322 BC). Colden complained that astronomers were making progress but “Physicians remain Ignorant of the Frame & figure of the Minute parts of the Body.”5

Aristotle’s History of Animals and On the Generation of Animals