by Adam Cohen
Despite the rise of informed consent: Lombardo, “Eugenic Sterilization in Virginia,” 129.
The jury, which delivered its verdict: Ibid., 129–33; Lombardo, Three Generations, 76.
The judge warned Dr. Priddy: Noll, “Sterilization of Willie Mallory,” 41; W. I. Prichard, “History—Lynchburg Training School and Hospital,” Mental Health in Virginia 11 (Summer 1960), 46.
The Mallory case: Lombardo, Three Generations, 76.
In 1919, North Carolina and Alabama: Randall Hansen and Desmond King, Sterilized by the State: Eugenics, Race, and the Population Scare in Twentieth-Century North America (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 76–77.
When the bill was introduced: J. S. DeJarnette, “Eugenic Sterilization in Virginia,” reprinted from Virginia Medical Monthly (1931), Records of Western State Hospital, box 88, Library of Virginia; Lombardo, “Eugenic Sterilization in Virginia,” 132.
“They might get all of us”: Lombardo, “Eugenic Sterilization in Virginia,” 132.
One required inmates: Ibid., 143–44.
Strode’s second bill: Ibid.
Dr. Priddy told Strode: Ibid.
It had been rejected: Ibid.
After his discouraging: Ibid.; Lombardo, “Eugenic Sterilization in Virginia,” 154–55.
“It is to be hoped”: State Colony for Epileptics and Feeble-Minded: Second Biennial Report, 1922–1923, box 7, Central Virginia Training Center Papers.
In October 1923: “Tribute to Albert Sidney Priddy,” in “16th Annual Report of the State Colony for Epileptics and Feeble-Minded, 1924–1925,” box 17, Central Virginia Training Center Papers.
“carried” their “troubles”: DeJarnette, “Sterilization Law of Virginia.”
The board believed: Strode to Dr. Don Preston Peters, July 19, 1939, box 29, Aubrey Strode Papers, Albert and Shirley Small Special Collections Library, University of Virginia (hereafter cited as Strode Papers).
This time, Strode agreed: Aubrey Strode, “Sterilization of Defectives,” Nov. 1924 (typed unpublished manuscript), box 55, Strode Papers.
Laughlin’s book included: Harry Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization in the United States (Chicago: Psychopathic Library of the Municipal Court of Chicago, 1922), 445.
Strode made a “diligent effort”: Strode, “Sterilization of Defectives.”
Strode included three of the categories: Virginia Sterilization Act of March 20, 1924, 1924 Va. Acts 569; Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization, 445–47; Dorr, Segregation’s Science, 128.
When Virginia’s law was challenged: Virginia Sterilization Act; Brief for Plaintiff in Error, Buck v. Bell, U.S. Supreme Court, Oct. Term, 1926, 19; Stephen A. Siegel, “Justice Holmes, Buck v. Bell, and the History of Equal Protection,” Minnesota Law Review 90 (2005): 128.
Like Laughlin’s model: Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization, 447–50; Virginia Sterilization Act.
Eugenic sterilization laws had been struck down: Smith v. Board of Examiners, 88 A. 963 (N.J., 1913) In re Thomson, 169 N.Y.S. 638 (Sup. Ct. 1918), aff’d Osborn v. Thomson, 171 N.Y.S. 1094 (App. Div. 1918); Haynes v. Lapeer Circuit Judge, 201 Mich. 138, 166 N.W. 938 (1918); “Notes and Abstracts,” Journal of the American Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology (Feb. 1919): 596–97; Harry Bruinius, Better for All the World: The Secret History of Forced Sterilization and America’s Quest for Racial Purity (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2006), 219.
In his treatise: Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization, 440.
Despite this emphatic warning: Virginia Sterilization Act.
He was, however, apparently absent: Lombardo, “Eugenic Sterilization in Virginia,” 106 and 106n14.
Strode gave his bill: Strode to Peters, July 19, 1939; Lombardo, “Eugenic Sterilization in Virginia,” 166.
Dr. Priddy and Dr. DeJarnette: Lombardo, “Eugenic Sterilization in Virginia,” 165.
Strode’s bill became law: Ibid., 166–67.
“This proves Abraham Lincoln’s theory”: Strode, “Sterilization of Defectives”; DeJarnette, “Eugenic Sterilization in Virginia.”
The State Hospital Board accepted Strode’s advice: Aubrey Strode to Harry Laughlin, Sept. 30, 1924, box 3, folder 8, Arthur Estabrook Papers, M. E. Grenander Department of Special Collections and Archives, University at Albany, State University of New York; Lombardo, Three Generations, 102.
Dr. Priddy became the architect: Strode to Peters, July 19, 1939.
He began by obtaining: Lombardo, Three Generations, 101.
Dr. Priddy and Strode: Lombardo, “Eugenic Sterilization in Virginia,” 96.
The law applied: Virginia Sterilization Act.
Based on the statutory criteria: “Carrie Buck Trial Transcript, 51–100” (2009), Buck v. Bell Documents, Paper 32, http://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/buckvbell/32, 88–89.
Dr. Priddy had hundreds: Ibid.
It did not take him long: Ibid., 88–89.
Dr. Priddy also had: Ibid., 89, 90–91.
That would be costly: Ibid., 89.
On July 21, 1924: “Order of July 21, 1924,” Buck v. Bell file, Clerk’s Office, Amherst County Courthouse, Amherst, VA; “Petition to the Special Board of Directors of State Colony for Epileptics and Feeble-Minded,” in “Carrie Buck Trial Transcript, 1–50” (2009), Buck v. Bell Documents, Paper 31, http://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/buckvbell/31, 8–10.
Shelton was authorized: “Order of July 21, 1924”; Bruinius, Better for All the World, 59.
The law required: Lombardo, Three Generations, 289.
On July 24, Dr. Priddy petitioned: Notice of Filing of Petition, Before the Special Board of Directors of State Colony for Epileptics and Feeble-Minded, in “Carrie Buck Trial Transcript, 1–50” (2009), Buck v. Bell Documents, Paper 31, http://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/buckvbell/31, 11.
Tracking the language: “Petition to the Special Board of Directors of State Colony for Epileptics and Feeble-Minded.”
It was in Carrie’s: Petition to Sterilize Carrie Buck, Buck v. Bell case file, Clerk’s Office, Amherst County Courthouse, Amherst, VA; J. David Smith and K. Ray Nelson, The Sterilization of Carrie Buck: Was She Feebleminded or Society’s Pawn? (Far Hills, NJ: New Horizon Press, 1989), 41.
Carrie was present: “Statement of Evidence Before Board of Directors, Priddy v. Buck” in “Carrie Buck Trial Transcript, 1–50,” 24
During his tenure: “Carrie Buck Trial Transcript, 1–50” (2009), Buck v. Bell Documents, Paper 31, http://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/buckvbell/31, 24–25.
What was it about: Ibid., 25.
In the “History and Clinical Notes”: “History and Clinical Notes,” June 4, 1924, box 11, Carrie Buck file, Library of Virginia.
Nor did he tell: Ibid., 60.
He testified: “Carrie Buck Trial Transcript, 1–50,” 25.
The depositions of John and Alice Dobbs: Inquisition, Jan. 23, 1924, in “Carrie Buck Trial Transcript, 1–50,” 15.
In his “History and Clinical Notes”: “History and Clinical Notes,” June 4, 1924.
At the time of Carrie’s commitment hearing: Inquisition, Jan. 23, 1924, in “Carrie Buck Trial Transcript, 1–50,” 15.
Dr. Priddy then delivered: “Carrie Buck Trial Transcript, 1–50,” 25–26.
He made no attempt: Ibid., 26–27.
Dr. Priddy was able to respond: Ibid., 26.
Shelton asked: Ibid.
Carrie’s sterilization hearing: Ibid., 27.
Despite Carrie’s apparent confusion: Ibid.
Nonetheless, the official record: “Continued Notes,” box 11, Central Virginia Training Center Papers.
“by the laws of heredity”: Order of the Board of Special Directors, in “Carrie Buck Trial Transcript, 1–50,” 27–29, http://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1030&context=buckvbell.
But Shelton did appeal: “Continued Notes,” Notice of Appeal a
nd Praecipe for Transcript of Record, October 3, 1924, Circuit Court of Amherst County, http://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1030&context=buckvbell.
Carrie’s “guardian at our request”: Priddy to Laughlin, Oct. 14, 1924.
The appeal claimed: Notice of Appeal and Praecipe for Transcript of Record, October 3, 1924, in “Carrie Buck Trial Transcript, 1–50,” 5.
While the appeal was pending: An Act to Provide for the Sexual Sterilization of Inmates of State Institutions in Certain Cases, Virginia Acts of Assembly, chap. 394 (1924).
Whitehead had extraordinarily close: Lombardo, Three Generations, 107.
The two men: Ibid., 74, 216.
He served on the colony’s board: Lombardo, Three Generations, 74, 148; Bruinius, Better for All the World, 61; Steven Noll, Feeble-Minded in Our Midst (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1995), 65.
In April the colony had recognized: Bruinius, Better for All the World, 61; State Colony for Epileptics and Feeble-Minded: Second Biennial Report, 7; Paul Lombardo, “Three Generations, No Imbeciles: New Light on Buck v. Bell,” New York University Law Review 60 (April 1985): 55 147n.
Whitehead had moved: Lombardo, Three Generations, 74.
Whitehead had supported: Ibid.
Further complicating the relationships: Priddy to I. P. Whitehead, Dec. 12, 1924, box 11, Central Virginia Training Center Papers.
His representation of Carrie: Lombardo, Three Generations, 154.
The Amherst County Circuit Court: “Carrie Buck Trial Transcript, 1–50,” 42.
The eugenicists had won: State v. Feilen, 70 Wash. 65, 126 P. 75 (1912); Reilly, Surgical Solution, 51; Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization, 196.
In 1913 the New Jersey Supreme Court: “Notes and Abstracts,” 596–97.
The court ruled: Mark A. Largent, Breeding Contempt: The History of Coerced Sterilization in the United States (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2011), 86.
another ruling against sterilization: Davis v. Berry, 216 F. 413, 416–17 (S.D. Iowa 1914); Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization, 186–90.
Those rulings were relevant: “Notes and Abstracts,” 596–97; Bruinius, Better for All the World, 219.
The court ruled that the 1907: Hansen and King, Sterilized by the State, 78; Williams v. Smith, 190 Ind. 526, 131 N.E. 2d (1921).
In all, from 1913 to 1921: Siegel, “Justice Holmes,” 106, 121–22; William Leuchtenburg, The Supreme Court Reborn: The Constitutional Revolution in the Age of Roosevelt (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 6.
not everyone was caught up in the eugenic mania: Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization, 35, 40, 46, 48; Leuchtenburg, The Supreme Court Reborn, 6.
Nebraska’s governor insisted: Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization, 48.
In a letter to Dr. Priddy: Aubrey Strode to Albert Priddy, Oct. 7, 1924, box 11, Central Virginia Training Center Papers.
CHAPTER FOUR: HARRY LAUGHLIN
The states that followed: Randall Hansen and Desmond King, Sterilized by the State: Eugenics, Race, and the Population Scare in Twentieth-Century North America (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 77.
This large national movement: Garland E. Allen, “The Eugenics Record Office at Cold Spring Harbor, 1910–1940: An Essay in Institutional History,” Osiris 2 (1986), 226, 238.
Harry Hamilton Laughlin: Francis Marion Green, Hiram College and Western Reserve Eclectic Institute: Fifty Years of History 1850–1900 (Cleveland: O. S. Hubbell, 1901), 261; Harry Bruinius, Better for All the World: The Secret History of Forced Sterilization and America’s Quest for Racial Purity (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2006), 174–80; newspaper obituary of Deborah Laughlin (no title, undated, no publication), box E-1-1:10, Harry H. Laughlin Papers, Pickler Memorial Library, Truman State University, Kirksville, MO (hereafter cited as Laughlin Papers).
George Laughlin: History of Portage County, Ohio (Chicago: Warner, Beers, 1885), 747.
they settled in Hiram: Green, Hiram College, 260–61; Jan Onofrio, Iowa Biographical Dictionary (St. Clair Shores, Mich.: Somerset Publishers, Inc. 2000), 1:464.
The family finally settled: Bruinius, Better for All the World, 180; newspaper clipping, box E-1-1:10, Laughlin Papers; “Biography of Harry H. Laughlin,” Special Collections University Archives, Pickler Memorial Library, Truman State University, https://library.truman.edu/ manuscripts/laughlinbio.asp; Frances Janet Hassencahl, “Harry H. Laughlin, ‘Expert Eugenics Agent’ for the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, 1921 to 1931” (Ph.D. diss., Case Western Reserve University, 1970), 43.
Laughlin’s parents had met: Bruinius, Better for All the World, 176.
Deborah Ross Laughlin: Hassencahl, “Expert Eugenics Agent,” 45–46; History of Portage County, Ohio, 747.
When she was not busy: Hassencahl, “Expert Eugenics Agent,” 45–46.
A compelling public speaker: Obituary of Deborah Laughlin, Kirksville Daily Express, Sept. 20, 1918, box E-1-1:7, Laughlin Papers; Hassencahl, “Expert Eugenics Agent,” 45–46; Bruinius, Better for All the World, 177–78.
She was especially drawn: “Woman’s Christian Temperance Union,” Encyclopedia of American Religion and Politics, ed. Paul Dupe and Laura Olson (New York: Facts on File, 2003), 487.
Deborah Laughlin led antidrinking “pray-ins”: Hassencahl, “Expert Eugenics Agent,” 46; Bruinius, Better for All the World, 178.
His mother’s ancestry: Hassencahl, “Expert Eugenics Agent,” 43, 46; History of Portage County, Ohio, 747.
His father’s family: Green, Hiram College, 261.
In “Cosmopolitanism in America,” a paper: Harry Laughlin, “Cosmopolitanism in America” (1899), 15, box E-1-1, Laughlin Papers.
That intellectual moralism: Allen, “Eugenics Record Office,” 236.
“eventually the world will be inhabited”: Laughlin, “Cosmopolitanism in America,” 15.
after graduating from college: “Biography of Harry H. Laughlin,” https://library.truman.edu/manuscripts/laughlinbio.asp.
In 1902 he married: Bruinius, Better for All the World, 186.
Laughlin came home: “Biographical Sketches,” box E-1-1:7, Laughlin Papers; Daniel J. Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985), 102; Catalogue of Princeton University, 1918–19 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1918), 358–59.
A profile: “Biographical Sketches,” box E-1-1:7, Laughlin Papers.
Davenport, the director: Harry Laughlin to Charles Davenport, Feb. 25, 1907, Laughlin folder 1, Charles Benedict Davenport Papers, American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia (hereafter cited as Davenport Papers); Davenport to Laughlin, March 1, 1907, Laughlin folder 1, Davenport papers.
He arranged to meet: Allen, “Eugenics Record Office,” 237; Hassencahl, “Expert Eugenics Agent,” 54; Philip R. Reilly, The Surgical Solution: A History of Involuntary Sterilization in the United States (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991), 58.
Laughlin persuaded Davenport: Allen, “Eugenics Record Office,” 237.
“Your visit here”: Laughlin to Davenport, Jan. 30, 1909, Laughlin folder 1, Davenport Papers; Davenport to Laughlin, Dec. 10, 1908, ibid.; Laughlin to Davenport, Dec. 15, 1908, ibid.
The next year: Allen, “Eugenics Record Office,” 237.
“the most profitable six weeks”: Laughlin to Davenport, Mar. 30, 1908, Laughlin folder 1, Davenport Papers.
a mentor: Hassencahl, “Expert Eugenics Agent,” 53; Allen, “Eugenics Record Office,” 237–38.
Charles Benedict Davenport: Stamford Historical Society, “Portrait of a Family: Stamford Through the Legacy of the Davenports, Amzi Benedict Davenport, 1817–1894,” http://www .stamfordhistory.org/dav_amzi.htm; Amzi Benedict Davenport, A Supplement to the History and Genealogy of the Davenport Family, in England and America, fr
om A.D. 1086 to 1850 and Continued to 1876 (Stamford: private printing, 1876), 331.
The Davenports traced: Bruinius Better for all the World, 108–9.
Reverend Davenport, who cofounded: Ibid., 15; Francis J. Bremer, Building a New Jerusalem (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2012), 3.
The book—the title page: Stamford Historical Society, “Portrait of a Family”; A History and Genealogy of the Davenport Family in England and America, from A.D. 1086 to 1850 (New York: S.W. Benedict, 1851); Amzi Benedict Davenport, A Supplement to the History and Genealogy of the Davenport Family; Edwin Black, War Against the Weak (New York: Four Walls Eight Windows, 2003), 32–33; Reilly, Surgical Solution, 18.
Charles Davenport attended Harvard: Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics, 45; Harvard University Directory (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1914), 202; Joshua Chamberlain, ed. Universities and Their Sons: History, Influence and Characteristics of American Universities (Boston: R. Herndon 1900), 15.
He began to look: Allen, “Eugenics Record Office,” 228.
Davenport secured annual funding: Ibid., 230.
In 1904 he founded: Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics, 45; Allen, “Eugenics Record Office,” 229–30.
He wrote a paper: Allen, “Eugenics Record Office,” 230–31, 232.
Davenport had traveled to England: Carolyn Fluehr-Lobban, Race and Racism: An Introduction (Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press, 2006), 118.
It sought to bring together: Allen, “Eugenics Record Office,” 232.
The Breeders’ Association’s members: Allen, “Eugenics Record Office,” 232.
“Science is taking hold”: Mark A. Largent, Breeding Contempt: The History of Coerced Sterilization in the United States (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2011), 50.
It formed a Committee on Eugenics: Ibid., 51.
The committee chairman: Hassencahl, “Expert Eugenics Agent,” 55–61; Allen, “Eugenics Record Office,” 232.
Davenport served as secretary: Hassencahl, “Expert Eugenics Agent,” 55–6l; Allen, “Eugenics Record Office,” 232; James W. Trent Jr., Inventing the Feeble Mind: A History of Mental Retardation in the United States (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994), 171.