Previous | TOC

1 I have tried to follow the advice given in Stephen Jay Gould, The Mismeasure of Man (New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1981), p. 27, "Since many of the cases presented here are so patent, so risible, by today's standards, I wish to emphasize that I have not taken cheap shots at marginal figures....Cheap shots are gossip, not history; they are ephemeral and uninfluential, however amusing. I have focused upon the leading and most influential scientists of their times...." I must except my mentions of Delia Howe and of the relatively unimportant W. D. McKim who advocated mass eugenic slaughter of the unfit, although I included the latter primarily as a counterpart to David Starr Jordan's tentative embrace of the same idea.

2 Linda Gordon, Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America (New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976; Penguin Books, 1977) and William Leach, True Love and Perfect Union: The Feminist Reform of Sex and Society (New York: Basic Books, 1980; Middletown, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press, 1989) both rely heavily on such a distinction. See also, for example, Mark H. Haller, Eugenics: Hereditarian Attitudes in American Thought (New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1963, 1984), who sets forth an analysis of the eugenics movement which de-emphasizes its conservative impact. Haller notes with some surprise on p. 140, for example, that eugenic sterilization laws were more frequently enforced against the poor than the genetically unfit--"Oddly enough, in actual administration the laws have been used chiefly for their social rather than their eugenic consequences." Similarly, Daniel J. Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1985), p. 49, argues, for example, that socially prominent eugenicist Charles Davenport, who wrote frequently of the dangers of racial miscegenation and praised Mussolini's fascism, "did not base his eugenics on any political world-view, because he had none." Barry Mehler has refuted these ideas with a history of the American eugenics movement which stresses the consistent racism and political conservatism of the movement over time, "A History of the American Eugenics Society 1921-1940" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1988). Allan Chase etc.

3 Daniel J. Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1985) makes such a distinction between the mainstream and radical wings of the movement.

4 See, for example, Kenneth M. Ludmerer, Genetics and American Society: A Historical Appraisal (Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins Press, 1972), who argues on pp. 14-15, "In general, these men were sincere and well-intentioned, but their claim that the eugenics program rested firmly upon a valid genetic foundation was based more on faith than on first-hand assurance....It mattered little that genetic science progressed rapidly during those thirty years for eugenicists tended to understand the later developments no better than they did the initial discoveries in genetics that for a short time made eugenic schemes seem feasible." On p. 33, he continues, "Nevertheless, without a conscious sense of being intellectually dishonest, these eugenicists managed to disregard, circumvent, or misinterpret such criticisms. They were not so much sincere and misguided as sincere and incapable of being guided." Among the contemporaneous legal commentators, Frederick Fenning, "Sterilization Laws From a Legal Standpoint," 4 J. Criminology and Criminal Law 804 (1914), p. 805, is typical: "As to sterilization laws, however, one must be impressed by the fact that those who have advocated their passage have been actuated solely by a sincere desire to better the great body social. The public spirit which has thus inspired legal activity in the direction indicated, and the undoubted absence of selfish motives must be given the stamp of the public's approval..."

5 Ludmerer, for example, explains on p. 33 how to distinguish the racist eugenicists (often active in the anti-immigration movement) while Haller talks of anti-immigration advocates finding "in eugenics the arguments to bolster their case for immigration restriction." (p. 6) Haller also denies that the eugenicists campaigned in favor of anti-miscegenation statutes, but acknowledges that they lent such campaigns "scientific support." (p. 159).

6 Gordon, for example, argues that the eugenics movement was primarily grounded in the social purity and perfectionist impulses of the nineteenth century, and explicitly argues against its descent from self-consciously racist movements.

7 Allen Chase's Legacy of Malthus: The Social Costs of the New Scientific Racism (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1977), while of great value to the reader on the race and economic biases of the eugenics movement, puts forth on p. 72 a definition of the key concept of scientific racism that obscures its racial basis--"the creation and employment of a body of legitimately scientific, or patently pseudo-scientific, data as rationales for the preservation of poverty, inequality of opportunity for upward mobility, and related regressive social arrangements."

8 Francis Galton, Memories of My Life (London: Methuen & Co., 1908), p. 290, cited in James A. Field, The Progress of Eugenics (Cambridge: Harvard University, 1911), p.11.

9 American Eugenics Society, Organized Eugenics (New Haven, Connecticut: American Eugenics Society), p. 31.

10 Allan Chase, The Legacy of Malthus: The Social Costs of the New Scientific Racism (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1977), p. 14.

11 Francis Galton, Inquiries Into Human Faculty (London: Macmillan, 1883), pp. 24-25.

12 Allan Chase, The Legacy of Malthus: The Social Costs of the New Scientific Racism (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1977), pp. 82, 308-09.

13 Daniel J. Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1985), pp. 33-34.

14 Havelock Ellis, The Problem of Race Regeneration (London: National Council of Public Morals, 1911; New York: Privately Printed, 1926), p. 33.

15 Ibid., pp. 55-56.

16 Kenneth M. Ludmerer, Genetics and American Society: A Historical Appraisal (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press), 1972. I have relied heavily on Ludmerer in this discussion of genetics.

17 David Starr Jordan, The Heredity of Richard Roe: A Discussion of the Principles of Eugenics (Boston: American Unitarian Association, 1911), preface (unpaginated).

18 David Starr Jordan, The Heredity of Richard Roe: A Discussion of the Principles of Eugenics (Boston: American Unitarian Association, 1911), p. 35.

19 Albert Edward Wiggam, The New Decalogue of Science (Indianapolis: Bobbs Merrill Co., 1922), p. 43. Check this cite.

20 American Eugenics Society, Organized Eugenics (New Haven, Connecticut: American Eugenics Society, 1931), p. iv.

21 Albert Edward Wiggam, The Fruit of the Family Tree (Indianapolis: Bobbs Merrill Co., 1924), p. 1.

22 Ibid., pp. 282-83.

23 Delia E. Howe, M.D., Mental Health for the Children of Tomorrow (Boston: Geo. H. Ellis, Co., Printers, 1903), pp. 48-49.

24 This list is compiled from a variety of sources, including Davenport's Race Improvement Through Eugenics, cited in James A. Field, The Progress of Eugenics (Cambridge: Harvard University, 1911) and Davenport's Heredity in Relation to Eugenics (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1911) and Eugenics: The Science of Human Improvement By Better Breeding (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1910), an address that was read by invitation to the American Academy of Medicine at Yale University on November 12, 1909.

25 Daniel J. Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1985), p. 49.

26 Hilda Herrick Noyes, M.D. and George Wallingford Noyes, A.B., "The Oneida Community Experiment in Stirpiculture," Scientific Papers of the Second International Congress of Eugenics, Volume One: Eugenics, Genetics and the Family (Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins Co., 1923; reprint ed., New York: Garland Publishing, 1985), p. 374.

27 Barry Mehler, "A History of the American Eugenics Society 1921-1940" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1988), p. 61.

28 Organized Eugenics (New Haven, Connecticut: American Eugenics Society, 1931), p. 45.

29 The history of the American Eugenics Society in traced in greater detail in Barry Mehler, "A History of the American Eugenics Society, 1921-1940" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1988).

30 Organized Eugenics (New Haven, Connecticut: American Eugenics Society, 1931), p. 60.

31 Official Proceedings of the First National Conference on Race Betterment (Battle Creek, Michigan, 1914), p. 245; Race Betterment Exhibit Pamphlet (Battle Creek, Michigan, 1914).

32 Ibid.

33 Official Proceedings of the Second National Conference on Race Betterment (Battle Creek, Michigan: Race Betterment Foundation, 1915), p. 74.

34 Ibid., p. 29.

35 Scientific Papers of the Second International Congress of Eugenics, Volume One: Eugenics, Genetics and the Family (Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins Co., 1923; reprint ed., New York: Garland Publishing, 1985), p. 405.

36 Although a number of historians, including John Higham, Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism 1860-1925 (1955; New York: Atheneum, 1975), p. 153, have argued that the practitioners of the new science of anthropology entirely avoided the eugenics movement, Haller (once a proponent of that view) has since argued in the Introduction to the paperback edition of Eugenics: Hereditarian Attitudes in American Thought (1963; New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1984), p. xiii, "The research of George W. Stocking, Jr., has demonstrated, however, that anthropologists were deeply divided in the 1910's and early 1920's and disputed bitterly in battles that were both personal and ideological."

37 Allan Chase, The Legacy of Malthus: The Social Costs of the New Scientific Racism (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1977), p. 165.

38 Lothrop Stoddard, The Rising Tide of Color Against White Supremacy (New York: , 1920), pp. 219-21, cited in Paul A. Lombardo, "Miscegenation, Eugenics, and Racism: Historical Footnotes to Loving v. Virginia," 21 U. of California, Davis Law Review 421 (1987-88), p. 431n.

39 Edward Thorndike, Human Nature and the Social Order (New York: Macmillan Co., 1940), p. 356, quoted in Allan Chase, The Legacy of Malthus: The Social Costs of the New Scientific Racism (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1977), p. 355.

40 Organized Eugenics (New Haven, Connecticut: American Eugenics Society, Inc., 1931), p. 47.

41 C. W. Saleeby, Methods of Race Regeneration (New York: Moffat, Yard & Company, 1911), p. 46; James A. Field, The Progress of Eugenics (Cambridge: Harvard University, 1911), p. 50.

42 David Starr Jordan, The Heredity of Richard Roe: A Discussion of the Principles of Eugenics (Boston: American Unitarian Association, 1911), p. 125.

43 Harry H. Laughlin, ed., The Second International Exhibition of Eugenics Sept. 22 to Oct. 22, 1921 (Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins Co., 1923).

44 Scientific Papers of the Second International Congress of Eugenics, Volume Two: Eugenics in Race and State (Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins Co., 1923; reprint ed., New York: Garland Publishing, 1985), p. ix.

45 Ibid., p. 2.

46 Frank Hamilton Hankins, The Racial Basis of Civilization: A Critique of the Nordic Doctrine (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1926), p. 128, quoted in Allan Chase, The Legacy of Malthus: The Social Costs of the New Scientific Racism (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1977), p. 96.

47 Ibid., p. 7. A complete discussion of Bean's argument (but no mention of his later eugenics activism) can be found in Stephen Jay Gould, The Mismeasure of Man (New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1981), pp. 77-82.

48 Ibid., p. 60.

49 Stephen Jay Gould, The Mismeasure of Man (New York: W.W. Norton, 1981), pp. 109-111.

50 Ibid., p. 68.

51 Ibid., pp. 186-188.

52 Ibid., p. 327.

53 Ibid., p. 373.

54 John Higham, Strangers in the Land: Patterns in American Nativism 1860-1925 (1955; New York: Atheneum, 1973), pp. 102-03, 152, 162-63; Kenneth M. Ludmerer, Genetics and American Society: A Historical Appraisal (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1972), pp. 107-08; Allan Chase, The Legacy of Malthus: The Social Costs of the New Scientific Racism (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1977), pp. 140-43.

55 Organized Eugenics (New Haven, Connecticut: American Eugenics Society, 1931), pp. 54-60, 66-67.

56 Ibid., p. 46.

57 Organized Eugenics (New Haven, Connecticut: American Eugenics Society, 1931), p. 18.

58 "Interrogatories of H.H. Laughlin (1924)," Record, Buck v. Bell, p. 31.

59 Allan Chase, The Legacy of Malthus: The Social Costs of the New Scientific Racism (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1977), p. 301.

60 Ibid., p. 649n.

61 Irving Fisher, "Impending Problems of Eugenics," The Science Monthly, Sept. 1921, pp. 226-227.

62 Committee of the American Neurological Association, Eugenical Sterilization 24-25 (1936). Check this cite.

63 American Medical Association Proceedings 54 (May, 1937), cited in Elyce Zenoff, "Reappraisal of Eugenic Sterilization Laws," 10 Cleveland-Marshall Law Review 149 (1961), p. 159.

64 Richard Hofstadter, Social Darwinism in American Thought (New York: George Braziller, 1959).

65 Linda Gordon, Woman's Body, Woman's Right (New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976; Penguin Books, 1977.

66 Kenneth M. Ludmerer, Genetics and American Society: A Historical Appraisal (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1972).

67 Allan Chase, The Legacy of Malthus: The Social Costs of the New Scientific Racism (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1977). For a different view, arguing that Malthusian thought was more complex than a simple defense of the capitalist industrialist class, see Linda Gordon, Woman's Body, Woman's Right (1974; New York: Penguin Books, 1977), esp. pp. 72-91.

68 D. P. Pickens, Eugenics and the Progressives (Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 1968).

69 Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905), Holmes, J. dissenting, cited by Kenneth M. Ludmerer, Genetics and American Society: A Historical Appraisal (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press), 1972.

70 John Higham, Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism 1860-1925 (1955; New York: Atheneum, 1973), p. 135.

71 Stephen Jay Gould, The Mismeasure of Man (New York: W.W. Norton, 1981, p. 120.

72 Allan Chase, The Legacy of Malthus: The Social Costs of the New Scientific Racism (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1977), esp. pp. 72-84.

73 1 Holmes-Laski Letters 249 (M. Howe ed. 1953), p. 658, cited in Mary L. Dudziak, "Oliver Wendell Holmes as Eugenic Reformer: Rhetoric in the Writing of Constitutional Law," 71 Iowa L. R. 833 (1986), p. 842.

74 One example is Weld A. Rollins, "A Review of Dr. J.H. Landman's Book on Human Sterilization Together With Some Facts as to the Recent and Prospective Growth of Mental Deficiency in Massachusetts and Elsewhere, and Observations on Its Possible Consequences," 18 Mass. L. Q. 60 (1933), p. 70n.

75 Ibid., p. 100.

76 Quoted in David Starr Jordan, The Heredity of Richard Roe: A Discussion of the Principles of Eugenics (Boston: American Unitarian Association, 1911), pp. 114-116.

77 Barry Mehler, "History of the American Eugenics Society 1921-1940" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1988) affirms that the eugenics movement was an "intergral part" of the Progressive movement and concludes the two groups were attracted to each other "by a fear of degeneracy and a dream of a better world." (p. 31)

78 Mark H. Haller, Eugenics: Hereditarian Attitudes in American Thought (1963; New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1984), p. 5 makes this argument.

79 John Higham, Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism 1860-1925 (New York: Atheneum, 1973), pp. 117-123.

80 Mark H. Haller, Eugenics: Hereditarian Attitudes in American Thought (New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1963, 1984), pp. 76-77 mentions this fact, but Haller's book, like most histories of eugenics, does not explore the possible effects different economic analyses may have had on susceptibility to eugenicist thought. In particular, an examination of the effect of Marxist political and economic thought on the eugenics movement would be a contribution to the literature. Certainly the eugenicists themselves were anticommunists and spoke frequently of the socialist threat, but most historians do not discuss this.

81 Linda Gordon, Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America (New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976; Penguin Books, 1977), p. 132.

82 Robert Reid Rentoul, Race Culture; Or, Race Suicide? (A Plea for the Unborn) (New York: Walter Scott Publishing Co., 1906; facsimile ed., New York: Garland Pub., Inc., 1984), p. 31.

83 James A. Field, The Progress of Eugenics (Cambridge: Harvard University, 1911), p. 50.

84 Barry Mehler, "A History of the American Eugenics Society 1921-1940" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1988), p. 14.

85 This paragraph is based primarily on William Stanton, The Leopard's Spots: Scientific Attitudes Toward Race in America 1815-1859 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960), pp. 3-14; and Stephen Jay Gould, The Mismeasure of Man (New York: W.W. Norton, 1981, pp. 39-42.

86 Ibid., pp. 44-45.

87 Ibid., p.48.

88 Committee on the History and Survey of the Eugenics Movement, A Brief Bibliography on Eugenics (Eugenics Society of the United States of America, [1925, rev. 1927]).

89 Papers Communicated to the First International Eugenics Congress, Problems in Eugenics (London: Eugenics Education Society, 1912; rep. ed., New York: Garland Publishing, 1984), p. 48.

90 This description of the 1840 Census scandal is based primarily on a detailed account in William Stanton, The Leopard's Spots: Scientific Attitudes Toward Race in America 1815-1859 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960), pp. 54-72.

91 Ibid., pp. 65-71, 174-75.

92 Scientific Papers of the Second International Congress of eugenics, Volume Two: Eugenics in Race and State (Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins Co., 1923; reprint ed., New York: Garland Publishing, 1985), p. 405.

93 Even blunter was psychologist Knight Dunlap, who said in 51 The Scientific Monthly 221 (1940), which was cited in Walter Wheeler Cook, "Eugenics or Euthenics," 37 Illinois Law Review 287 (1943), p. 308n, that "the Kallikak Fantasy" had been "laughed out of psychology, along with the even more appalling legend of the Nams and the Jukes; but the theories involved in them still linger in popular superstition."

94 Davenport and Danielson, The Hill Folk (1912), p. 11, cited in Walter Wheeler Cook, "Eugenics or Euthenics," 37 Illinois Law Review 287 (1943), pp. 308-309.

95 As background research for this paper, I read virtually all of the law review articles for that period which were listed in legal indexes under such topics as "eugenics" and "sterilization."

96 Typical is a brief article in 2 Indiana Law Review 259 (1926), which says, "For an excellent article on Eugenics see the November, 1926, issue of World's Work, "The Rising Tide of Degeneracy," by Albert Edward Wiggam."

97 Clarence J. Ruddy, "Compulsory Sterilization: An Unwarranted Extension of the Powers of Government," 3 Notre Dame Lawyer 1 (1927) is typical. The article argued that sterilization was "the most drastic means so far adopted for the extinction of the individual." (p. 2)

98 See, for example, Vukowich, "The Dawning of the Brave New World--Legal, Ethical and Social Issues of Eugenics," 1971 U. Ill. L.F. 189, which calls explicitly for the adoption of a national eugenics program and concludes with this dire warning, "Great differences are inherent in an eugenics program. The benefits of an eugenics program are not immediately realizable. Therefore, man probably will not adopt an effective, large scale, eugenics program. Instead, he will continue to procreate without restraint, rely on palliatives, and watch his genetic heritage deteriorate." (p. 231)

99 15 Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 68 (1924), p. 78.

100 Ibid., p. 78.

101 Ibid.

102 Ibid., p. 82.

103 Ibid., pp. 85-89.

104 31 Law Notes 1 (April 1927); 31 Law Notes 182 (1927); 30 Law Notes 23 (May 1926), which claimed that "immigration brings to us chiefly the scum of foreign civilizations."

105 31 Law Notes 204 (Feb. 1925).

106 29 Law Notes 45 (June 1926).

107 31 Law Notes 101 (Sept. 1927); 32 Law Notes 108 (Sept. 1928).

108 35 Law Notes 164 (Dec. 1931), pp. 167-68.

109 H. H. Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization, pp. 446-47 (1922).

110 J. H. Landman, Human Sterilization (New York: Macmillan, 1932), p. 304.

111 J. H. Landman, "The Human Sterilization Movement," 24 J. of Criminal Law and Criminology 400 (1933), p. 400.

112 Smith v. Board of Examiners, 85 N. J. L. 46, 53, 88 Atl. 963, 966 (1913).

113 21 Case and Comment 22 (1914), p. 24.

114 4 Journal of Criminology and Criminal Law 326 (1913).

115 Ibid., p. 358.

116 One exception, which mentioned Boston, was Frederick Fenning, "Sterilization Laws From a Legal Standpoint," 4 J. of Criminology and Criminal Law 804 (1914), pp. 813-14. Another exception, which attacked Boston without using his name, was J. Miller Kenyon, "Sterilization of the Unfit," 1 Virginia Law Review 458 (1914).

117 Ibid., p. 341.

118 Haller, p. 104.

119 Cornell is at Ithaca, NY.

120 Record, Buck v. Bell, p. 32.

121 Record, Buck v. Bell, pp. 72-73.

122 J.H. Landman, "The History of Human Sterilization in the United States--Theory, Statute, Adjudication," 23 Illinois Law Review 463 (1929), p. 469.

123 An Act to prevent the procreation of habitual criminals, idiots, feeble-minded, insane and diseased and degenerate persons, Iowa G. L., Ch. 187, secs. 1 and 2 (1913).

124 Davis v. Walton, 74 Utah 80, 88, 276 P. 921, 924 (1929), cited in Robert L. Burgdorf, Jr. and Marcia Pearce Burgdorf, "The Wicked Witch Is Almost Dead: Buck v. Bell and the Sterilization of Handicapped Persons," 50 Temple Law Q. 995 (1977), p. 1013.

125 J. H. Landman, "The History of Human Sterilization in the United States--Theory, Statute, Adjudication," 23 Illinois Law Review 463 (1929), p. 467.

126 Several articles dealt with the topic: Dean W. D. Funkhouser, "Eugenical Sterilization," 23 Kentucky L. J. 511 (1935); Robert Edwin Hatton, "Is Compulsory Human Sterilization the Long Sought Solution for the Problem of Our Mental Incompetents?" 23 Kentucky L. J. 517 (1935); George T. Skinner, "Notes: A Sterilization Statute for Kentucky?" 23 Kentucky L. J. 168 (1934-35); Jay F. Arnold, "A Sterilization Law for Kentucky--Its Constitutionality," 24 Kentucky L. J. 220 (1935-36); and Jay F. Arnold, "Sociological Expediency of Sterilization Statute," 25 Kentucky L. J. 186 (1936-37).

127 Skinner, "A Sterilization Statute for Kentucky?" p. 168. The opening phrase, incidentally, is echoes without attribution J.H. Landman, "The History of Human Sterilization in the United States--Theory, Statute, Adjudication," 23 Illinois Law Review 463 (1929), where it also appears as the opening phrase.

128 W.D. Funkhouser (Dean, Graduate School, University of Kentucky), "Eugenical Sterilization," 23 Kentucky L. J. 511 (1935), pp. 511, 515.

129 Robert Edwin Hatton, Jr., "Is Compulsory Human Sterilization the Long Sought Solution for the Problem of Our Mental Incompetents?" 23 Kentucky L. J. 517 (1935), p. 527.

130 Richard Hofstadter, The Paranoid Style in American Politics and Other Essays (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1965), pp. 25-26.

131 Frances R. Schoenbach, "Notes and Comments: Sterilization Laws--Their Constitutionality--Their Social and Scientific Basis," 17 Boston University Law Review 246 (1937), p. 258.

132 8 Boston University Law Review 50 (1928), p. 53.

133 J.H. Landman, "The History of Human Sterilization in the United States--Theory, Statute, Adjudication," 23 Illinois Law Review 463 (1929), p. 470.

134 In re Thompson, 169 N. Y. Supp. 638 (1918).

135 Jay F. Arnold, "The Sociological Expediency of Sterilization Statute," 25 Kentucky L. J. 186 (1936-37), pp. 187-191.

136 John Bell, "Eugenical Sterilization" (unpublished paper presented at a May 13, 1929 meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, Atlanta, Georgia), cited in Robert J. Cynkar, "Buck v. Bell: 'Felt Necessities' v. Fundamental Values?" 81 Columbia L. R. 1418 (1981), p. 1430.

137 Jessie Spaulding Smith, "Marriage, Sterilization, and Commitment Laws Aimed at Decreasing Mental Deficiency," 5 J. of Criminology and Criminal Law 364 (1914), p. 365.

138 G. K. Chesterton, Eugenics and Other Evils (New York: Dodd, Mead and Co., 1927), p. 178.

139 Robert J. Cynkar, "Buck v. Bell: 'Felt Necessities' v. Fundamental Values?" 81 Columbia L. R. 1418 (1981), p. 1453, which notes, "There does not seem to have been much reaction among the general public to Buck v. Bell....Those articles that were written were mainly descriptive news stories."

140 The condescension with which Carrie Buck was treated endures today in the near universal custom by commentators of referring to Buck (and to none of the other principals in the case) by her first name.

141 The Record, Buck v. Bell, p. 9, in the Petition to the Board of Directors for sterilization authorization states, "...the said Carrie Buck desires that the said operation be performed."

142 (Charlottesville, Virginia) Daily Progress, Feb. 26, 1980, p. 1.

143 Aubrey Strode, "The Sterilization of Defectives," 11 Virginia Law Review 296 (1925).

144 Record, Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), p. 27.

145 Record, Buck v. Bell, p. 32.

146 Paul A. Lombardo, "Three Generations, No Imbeciles: New Light on Buck v. Bell," 60 New York University Law Review 30 (1985), pp. 33-34.

147 Ibid.; Paul Lombardo, "Eugenical Sterilization in Virginia: Aubrey Strode and the Case of Buck v. Bell" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Virginia, 1982).

148 Lombardo, "New Light on Buck v. Bell," p. 37n.

149 MQ has cite for this

150 Record, Buck v. Bell, pp. 29-40, 75-87.

151 Lombardo, "Eugenical Sterilization in Virginia," pp. 148-54, 195-99.

152 Lombardo, "New Light on Buck v. Bell," pp. 59-60.

153 Paul A. Lombardo, "Miscegenation, Eugenics, and Racism: Historical Footnotes to Loving v. Virginia," 21 U. of California, Davis Law Review 421 (1987-88), p. 446n.

154 greatest of all perils--the peril of miscegenation.

155 Record, Buck v. Bell, p. 77.

156 Ibid., pp. 77-79.

157 Ibid., p. 78.

158 Ibid., p. 85.

159 Ibid., p. 89.

160 Record, Buck v. Bell, pp. 9, 17.

161 Record, Buck v. Bell, p. 40.

162 Record, Buck v. Bell, p. 32.

163 Record, Buck v. Bell, pp. 32-33.

164 Record, Buck v. Bell, pp. 43-45.

165 Ibid., p. 45.

166 Ibid., p. 47.

167 Ibid., p. 48 (to Eula Wood).

168 Ibid., p. 53 (to John Hopkins).

169 Ibid., p. 43 (to John Hopkins).

170 Ibid., p. 56 (to Samuel Dudley).

171 Stephen Jay Gould, "Carrie Buck's Daughter," 2 Constitutional Commentary 331 (1985), p. 336.

172 Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), at 202.

173 One typical report is found in 12 Marquette L. Rev. 73 (1927), p. 73, which states, "Dr. William D. Belfield, of Chicago, a pioneer in this work, says it is less serious than the extraction of a tooth."

Previous | TOC

Online Articles:

Spotlight On
Explore

Browse Topics | Site Guide | Multimedia Bookstore | Magazine | Publications | Activists Resources

Political Research Associates

Copyright Information, Terms, and Conditions

Please read our Terms and Conditions for copyright information regarding downloading, copying, printing, and linking material on this site; our disclaimer about links present on this website; and our privacy policy.

Updates and Corrections