Tag Archives: Mental Illness

1922 Eugenics – New York State

Posted on by
1

Thirty New York State Institutions were subject to the 1912 statute. One man and forty-one women were sterilized. It is interesting to read the opinions of the superintendents of the custodial institutions from which sterilization was tested or performed: Auburn State Prison; Rome Custodial Asylum for the Feeble-Minded (test case of Frank Osborn challenged the New York statute); Buffalo and Gowanda State Hospitals. To read the opinions in their entirety, click on the RED link below.

Eugenics Record Office, Annual Meeting of the Eugenics Research Association, 1918 (Laughlin in front, Stewart House in background) http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/index2.html?tag=1664

Eugenics Record Office, Annual Meeting of the Eugenics Research Association, 1918 (Laughlin in front, Stewart House in background) http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/index2.html?tag=1664

NAMES: 1. Alexander Weinstein, 2. Dr. Howard J. Banker, 3. Robert W. Kegner, 4. Sarah Oates, 5. Dr. Oscar Riddle, 6. Ella Newman, 7. Mrs. H.H. Laughlin, 8. George MacArthur, 9. Ruth Gardiner, 10. Laura Garrett (Mrs. Clafflin), 11. Leslie E. Peckhem, 12. Edna Rosselot, 13. Dr. Arthur M. Banta, 14. No Name, 15. Emilee Viccari, 16. Mathilda Koch, 17. Louise A. Nelson, 18. Nua A. Minns, 19. Dr. B. Onuf, 20. Annie Henchman, 21. Dr. Wilhelmina E. Key, 22. Mrs. Howard J. Banker, 23. Mrs. Helen Martin Pitcher, 24. Julia F. Goodrich, 25. Dr. Arthur H. Harris, 26. Ethel Thayer, 27. Mrs. W.B. Browning, 28. Caroline E. Conway, 29. Alfie M. Newbuk, 30. Marion Collins, 31. Dr. Harry H. Laughlin, 32. Mrs. Estella Hughes, 33. Dr. Rene Sand, 34. Mrs. W.L.F. Brown, 35. Frederick Hoffman, 36. Mary Kitchell, 37. Mrs. Charles B. Davenport. 

New York “The statute dates from 1912. Present status (January 1, 1922): Repealed 1920, after having been declared unconstitutional by the lower courts in 1918. Thirty (30) state institutions were subject to the act before its repeal; they performed eugenical sterilizing operations as follows:

1. State Prison, Auburn – 1 Vasectomy
2. Clinton State Prison, Dannemora
3. Sing Sing Prison, Ossining
4. Great Meadow Prison, Comstock
5. Farm for Boys, Valatie
6. Reformatory, Elmira
7. Eastern New York Reformatory, Napanoch
8. Agricultural and Industrial School, Industry
9. Training School for Girls, Hudson
10. Western House of Refuge for Women, Albion
11. Reformatory for Women, Bedford Hills
12. Institution for Feeble-Minded Children, Syracuse
13. Newark State School, Newark
14. Custodial Asylum, Rome – Frank Osborn Test Case for New York Statute
15. Craig Colony for Epileptics, Sonyea
16. Letchworth Village, Thiells
17. Matteawan State Hospital, Beacon
18. State Hospital, Utica
19. State Hospital, Willard
20. Hudson River State Hospital, Poughkeepsie
21. State Hospital, Middletown
22. State Hospital, Buffalo – 12 Salpingectomies
23. State Hospital, Binghamton
24. St. Lawrence State Hospital, Ogdensburg
25. State Hospital, Rochester
26. Gowanda State Hospital, Collins – 29: 24 Salpingectomies; 5 Ovariotomies
27. State Hospital, Kings Park
28. State Hospital, Central Islip
29. Long Island State Hospital, Brooklyn
30. Manhattan State Hospital, Ward’s Island, N.Y.
Total to January 1, 1921: (42) 1 Vasectomy; 36 Salpingectomies; 5 Ovariotomies

(Institutions 3, 4, 5, 8, 17, 18, 19, 24, 25 and 29 did not supply historical comment.) 3. Sing Sing Prison, Ossining; 4. Great Meadow Prison, Comstock; 5. Farm for Boys, Valatie; 8. Agricultural and Industrial School, Industry; 17. Matteawan State Hospital, Beacon; 18. State Hospital, Utica; 19. State Hospital, Willard; 24. St. Lawrence State Hospital, Ogdensburg; 25. State Hospital, Rochester; 29. Long Island State Hospital, Brooklyn.

Auburn State Prison, Auburn, (a) Dr. Frank L. Heacox, Physician.
“The State Commission made a special study of a few cases, but no recommendations were made as to the cases investigated. One operation of double vasectomy was performed on one patient at his own and his family’s request. The patient was a youth twenty years of age, who was suffering from tubercular testicles.” Dr. Heacox stated that, in his opinion, the medical value of the statute was very little, but that eugenically it was invaluable. March, 1918. (b) “Our one case of eugenical sterilization was a voluntary one.” January, 1921.

Custodial Asylum, Rome. Dr. Charles Bernstein, Superintendent, from whose institution the test case for the New York statute arose, reported that there had been no operations under the law in his institution; that he could not in the ordinary course of professional practice perform any operation under this law that would be forbidden or illegal without it; that, in his opinion, “there was no medical value in the statute; and that, instead of being of eugenical value, the statute was a eugenical hindrance.” January, 1918.

Buffalo State Hospital (a) Dr. Arthur W. Hurd, Superintendent, in answer to inquiries, reported that he was doubtful whether the law, as it stood before tested in the courts, was applicable to inmates of the hospitals for the insane. He stated also that in reference to the medical value to the institution: “That it may be of a great deal of value in selected cases, as child-bearing, for instance, brings on recurrent attacks of insanity. Eugenically the statute is of much value in preventing the propagation of defectives. * * * Since 1912 six sterilizations have been done in this institution on women to produce sterility on account of the mental condition, which made it unwise that the patients should have any more children, and in two instances where the mental condition was in unmarried insane women and was accompanied by immoral tendencies. In each one of the cases we obtained the written consent of the relatives, which was filed in the case before such an operation was undertaken. We have always felt that indiscriminate sterilization among the insane was not indicated, but believe very strongly in it, and think it is of very great value in decreasing the number of people who would be born with a bad heredity, and also in saving the strength of women, for instance: If continued child-bearing would weaken the system, and in that way increase the tendency to mental breakdown.” February, 1918. (b) F. W. Parsons, Superintendent. “There have not been any untoward mental or physical effects resulting from our cases of salpingectomy, as the menstruation has continued uninterrupted. Before operating we obtain and file the written consent of husband, parent or guardian. Several defectives of bad moral tendencies were sterilized before they were allowed to go on parole, also a number of insane women with good intelligence and who had repeated attacks of insanity during pregnancy or the puerperium. The sterilization act is not in force in New York State. The hospital assumes the responsibility.” January, 1921.

Gowanda State Hospital, Collins. Dr. C. A. Potter, Superintendent. (a) In answer to inquiry concerning the medical and eugenical values of the statute, Dr. Potter replied: “If properly amended, the law would be of very great value in preventing recurrence of attacks of insanity, one of our cases has proven this conclusively. If enforced, after amendment, its eugenical value would be greater than any law of recent years which applies to institutions.” February, 1918. (b) “We note that several of our patients who have been sterilized have had no mental breakdown since the operation and have been able to fill their places in the household since they have not been exposed to pregnancy. Those cases which became insane on account of child-bearing or have a bad heredity but who could remain outside if not exposed to frequent child-bearing, are selected for sterilization and written consent is obtained from the husband or legal guardian, or nearest relative, the whole process and reasons therefor having been thoroughly explained. The public should be shown that insane, epileptics, feeble-minded and criminals have no right to procreate, from an economic standpoint as well as from the point of eugenics. The insane, feeble-minded, epileptics and criminals of child-bearing age should be sterilized.” January, 1921.”

1922 Eugenics Enforcement, Information and Opinions.

Eugenics Archive.

SOURCE: Reprinted from Eugenical Sterilization in the United States, Harry Hamilton Laughlin, D.Sc., Assistant Director of the Eugenics Record Office, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Cold Spring Harbor, Long Island, New York, and Eugenics Associate of the Psychopathic Laboratory of the Municipal Court of Chicago. Published by Psychopathic Laboratory of the Municipal Court of Chicago, December, 1922, Pages 81, 82, 84-87.

Washington State – Grave Concerns Association Model of Memorialization

Posted on by
1

For the past few years I have tried to get the attention of state and federal lawmakers to pass a law in New York State that would provide for the release of patient names; dates of birth and death; and location of graves, of people who were committed to State Hospitals and Custodial Institutions during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries who were buried in unmarked or numbered, anonymous graves, whether they be in formerly state, county, or city owned cemeteries. (See My Story) I also asked for a searchable, digital database, available to the public to be included in the bill. On August 22, 2011, I finally got the opportunity to meet with Kate Munzinger, Senator Joseph Robach’s Chief of Staff. Ms. Munzinger took the time to listen to what I was asking for.

Grave Concerns Association

Grave Concerns Association

The reason why I’m blogging about this issue again is because the bill in New York State has not yet become a law. There are caring people in several states who are pushing to get a similar law passed but state and federal representatives will not give them the time of day or they won’t even consider passing such a law because of the misinterpretation of the federal HIPAA Law. I want to help those people in other states by sharing with them what was shared with me. If not for Laurel Lemke, Chair of Grave Concerns Association, I don’t think I would have received the attention of Senator Robach. In 2004, Ms. Lemke and others, had fought for this cause, and managed to amend law 6678 in the State of Washington that allowed for the release of patient names for the purpose of memorialization. She emailed me the bill which I in turn gave to Kate Munzinger, Chief of Staff; Tim Ragazzo, Director of Operations & Legislation; and Senator Joseph Robach. A bill was drafted and introduced to the New York State Legislature in March 2012. The title of the bill is: “An act to amend the mental hygiene law, in relation to patients interred at state mental health hospital cemeteries.”

Western State Hospital, Pierce County, Washington, has 3,218 patients who are no longer anonymous. Grave Concerns Association has raised funds and replaced 1,200 names since 2004. The forgotten have been remembered with dignity. With community fund raising efforts and countless volunteers, inscribed headstones that identify the patient’s name, date of birth and death, have been placed at the graves; and a searchable, digital database has been uploaded to the internet. In contrast, New York State, with 22 or more former state custodial institutions combined has upwards of 11,000 or more people buried in anonymous graves who through no fault of their own have been erased from history. Willard State Hospital alone has close to 6,000 patients buried in anonymous graves.

Sherry Storms, Stacie Larson and Laurel Lemke, Grave Concerns Association, John Lucas, countless volunteers, and the State of Washington deserve to be recognized for their ground breaking, painstaking work, and above all, their model should be copied in every state in the union. The New York State bill is important and necessary in order to restore the dignity and personhood of the thousands of people who were incarcerated and died at former New York State Insane Asylums (later renamed State Hospitals), and State Custodial Institutions (for Feeble-Minded and Epileptic persons). When the bodies of the inmates were not claimed by family members, they were buried in anonymous, unmarked graves. Many of these unclaimed bodies went to medical colleges and pathology labs for the furtherance of medical science. These people deserve to be remembered, and we need to remember what happened to them so that we do not repeat the mistakes of our ancestors.

It is my hope that the State of New York, and all states, will pass similar legislation and follow the Washington State – Grave Concerns Model. They have done a great service for the community and the nation by naming the forgotten; setting up an exemplary, searchable, digital database; and trying their best to remove the stigma of mental illness.

WASHINGTON:
Grave Concerns Association
Volunteer Carla Wutz, descendent of Michael Wutz, updates the data base on the Grave Concerns website.

Grave Concerns Cemetery Database – Version 1.0 – Western State Hospital Historic PatientCemetery
http://www.wshgraveconcerns.org/search-the-database.html

Washington State Archives – Digital Archives

1912-1920 Eugenics in New York State

Posted on by
2

This is the story of Frank Osborn, a twenty-two year old man who was chosen to be sterilized by the Board of Examiners of Feeble-Minded (including idiots, imbeciles and morons), Epileptics and Other Defectives in the State of New York in 1915. Frank had committed no crime. He was feeble-minded, which in today’s terms would mean he was developmentally disabled. Frank had the intelligence of an eight year old and had been an inmate at the Rome State Custodial Asylum, Rome, New York, since 1907. Previous to that time, he had been an inmate at the Rochester Industrial School at Rochester, New York. Frank must have born about 1893. I do not know when or where he died, or where he was buried.

The whole point of Eugenics was to stop the defective population (insane, feeble-minded, criminal), from procreating. Frank Osborn was not sterilized because the New York State statute was ruled unconstitutional. What I find disgustingly amazing is the attitude of doctors, lawmakers, and men in general toward women. On page 19 of the testimony given by Dr. Charles Bernstein (The Trial of FRANK OSBORN 9.17.1915), clearly states that a seventeen year old woman had been gang raped but because she was feeble-minded and had been sterilized, the incident was not handled by authorities. “The fact that she was sterile made the authorities feel that it was not a matter for them.” 

To read more about Eugenics in New York State, please click on:
EUGENICS – New York State Timeline 1912-1920

Definitions:
1.Salpingectomy – surgical excision of a fallopian tube.

2. Ovariotomies – surgical incision of an ovary. (Not sure if this procedure is the same as Oophorectomy – the surgical removal of an ovary, called also ovariectomy.)

3. Vasectomy – surgical division or resection of all or part of the vas deferens usually to induce sterility.
(SOURCE: Definitions by Dictionary and Thesaurus – Merriam-Webster Online: http://www.merriam-webster.com/).

4. Eugenics – is the applied science of the bio-social movement which advocates the use of practices aimed at improving the genetic composition of a population, usually a human population. It is a social philosophy which advocates for the improvement of human hereditary traits through the promotion of higher reproduction of more desired people and traits, and the reduction of reproduction of less desired people and traits.

5. Dysgenics (also known as Cacogenics) – is the study of factors producing the accumulation and perpetuation of defective or disadvantageous genes and traits in offspring of a particular population or species. Dysgenic mutations have been studied in animals such as the mouse and the fruit fly. The term dysgenics was first used as an antonym of eugenics – the social philosophy of improving human hereditary qualities by social programs and government intervention.

6. Defendant -is any party required to answer a plaintiff’s complaint in a civil lawsuit, or any party that has been formally charged or accused of violating a criminal statute. (Respondent is the parallel term used in a proceeding which is commenced by petition).

7. Respondent -is a person who is called upon to issue a response to a communication made by another. In legal usage, this specifically refers to the defendant in a legal proceeding commenced by a petition, or to an appellee, or the opposing party, in an appeal of a decision by an initial fact-finder.

8. Plaintiff – also known as a claimant or complainant, is the term used in some jurisdictions for the party who initiates a lawsuit (also known as an action) before a court. In other words, someone who tries to sue. By doing so, the plaintiff seeks a legal remedy, and if successful, the court will issue judgment in favor of the plaintiff and make the appropriate court order (e.g., an order for damages).

9. Appeal – is a process for requesting a formal change to an official decision. The decision maker to whom the appeal is made may be a court, a board, a tribunal or even a single official. Generally, only the party aggrieved below has standing to appeal.
(SOURCE: Definitions by Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page)

1907 Eugenics

Posted on by
7

The mid-nineteenth century was the dawn of scientific thought and research concerning evolution and the human condition. Three men made an influential mark in history with their provocative theories which are still debated today. These men were: Charles Darwin, “natural selection;” Herbert Spencer, “survival of the fittest;” and Sir Francis Galton, “nature versus nurture.” Galton invented the term “eugenics.” Eugenics is the science of selective breeding in order to manipulate the gene pool and improve the human race. In other words, only certain members of society should be allowed to procreate. One of the goals of the Eugenics Movement was to rid the United States of the dregs of society: the defective, dependent, and delinquent classes by means of forced sterilization.

15 states enacted Eugenics legislation in America: Indiana, Washington, California, Connecticut, Nevada, Iowa, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Michigan, Kansas, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Oregon, and South Dakota. Eugenics began on March 9, 1907, with Indiana being the first state to enact a law, and ended on December 13, 1921, with Oregon proving the law unconstitutional. But that wasn’t the end. Wisconsin’s law was still active on January 1, 1922. From 1913 to January 1, 1921, the state of Wisconsin performed 76 forced sterilizations on inmates at the Home for Feeble-Minded at Chippewa Falls: 15 males (Vasectomy); and 61 females (Salpingectomy).

New York State passed a Eugenics Law on April 16, 1912, Chapter 445; Declared Unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of Albany County, March 5, 1918, and by Appellate Division July 1, 1918; and Repealed by the State Legislature, May 10, 1920. Forty-two operations were performed in the State of New York “while the statute was in force, but none of them was performed under this statute; all were performed by special arrangement with the patients and their families under the laws and customs governing ordinary surgical operations.” An agreement was made between the inmate who was targeted for sterilization and the inmate’s family, for permission to perform the needed operation that would make the life of their loved one more comfortable, leaving them to lead a productive, “normal” life. One vasectomy (1) was performed at the Auburn State Prison; twelve salpingectomies (2) at the Buffalo State Hospital; and twenty-four salpingectomies (2) and five ovariotomies (3) by the Gowanda State Hospital at Collins. Buffalo State Hospital opened in December 1880 and Gowanda State Homeopathic Hospital (Collins Farm) opened on August 9, 1898. Both were for the care of the mentally ill and were located in Erie County, New York.

These are the people mentioned in the book as being considered for sterilization and/or involved in litigation. According to my research, none of them were sterilized, with the possible exception of Peter Feilen.

Washington:
Peter Feilen, convicted rapist, inmate; ordered vasectomy, Washington State Penitentiary Walla Walla.

William Henry Harrison, inmate; ordered vasectomy, Washington State Penitentiary Walla Walla.

John Hill, inmate (stole hams for his family); ordered vasectomy, Yakima County, Washington.

Chris McCauley, alias Harry Taylor, inmate; ordered vasectomy, State Reformatory, Monroe, Washington. Formerly at Washington State Penitentiary Walla Walla.

New Jersey:
Alice Smith, epileptic: ordered salpingectomy; State Village for Epileptics at Skillman.

Iowa:
Rudolph Davis, twice convicted of felony; ordered vasectomy; Penitentiary at Fort Madison.

New York:
Frank Osborn, feeble-minded; ordered vasectomy; Rome State Custodial Asylum.

Nevada:
Pearley C. Mickle or Mickie, convict; ordered vasectomy, Elko County.

Michigan:
Nora Reynolds, inmate; ordered sterilization, Michigan Home and Training School at Lapeer.

Oregon:
Jacob Cline, convict; ordered sterilization, Oregon State Penitentiary.

ALL of this information was taken from the book Eugenical Sterilization in the Untied States by Harry Hamilton Laughlin.

Fountain Of The Ages by Charles Haag

Fountain Of The Ages by Charles Haag

Keep The Life Stream Pure

Introduction
Dr. Harry H. Laughlin, Eugenics Associate of the Psychopathic Laboratory of the Municipal Court of Chicago, and Eugenics Director of Carnegie Institution of Washington, Cold Springs Harbor, N. Y., has rendered the nation a signal service in the preparation of this work, “Eugenical Sterilization in the United States.”

Since the rediscovery of Mendel’s Law of Heredity and the recent advances made by the biologists and psychopathologists in respect to the causes of mental and physical defects in the human race, with the consequent revelation of the great role played by heredity as a producing cause, the science of eugenics has become of vital importance.

“Eugenics,” says Professor Irving Fisher, “stands against the forces which work for racial deterioration, and for improvement and vigor, intelligence and moral fiber of the human race. It represents the highest form of patriotism and humanitarianism, while at the same time it offers immediate advantages to ourselves and to our children. By eugenic measures, for instance, our burden of taxes can be reduced by decreasing the number of degenerates, delinquents and defectives supported in public institutions; such measures will also increase safeguards against crimes committed against our persons or our property.”

America, in particular, needs to protect herself against indiscriminate immigration, criminal degenerates, and race suicide.

The success of democracy depends upon the quality of its individual elements. If in these elements the racial values are high, government will be equal to all the economic, educational, religious and scientific demands of the times. If, on the contrary, there is a constant and progressive racial degeneracy, it is only a question of time when popular self-government will be impossible, and will be succeeded by chaos, and finally a dictatorship.

Dr. Laughlin is well qualified for the work he has undertaken. For twelve years he has been in immediate charge of the Eugenics Record Office (founded in 1910 by Mrs. E. H. Harriman and since 1918 a part of the Carnegie Institution of Washington), located at Cold Spring Harbor, Long Island, New York. There he is engaged in organizing and conducting eugenical investigations. He is, also, Expert Eugenics Agent of the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization of the House of Representatives of Washington, D. C., and recently organized the exhibits of the Second International Congress of Eugenics in New York City.

As a product of scientific research the book will have permanent value. The importance and usefulness of the work is not to be gauged by the extent of its circulation. Enough copies will be published to reach the leaders of the medical, legal and clerical professions, the press and members of legislative bodies.

The Municipal Court of Chicago, which has for years made an intensive study of crime prevention, punishment and suppression, feels privileged to be able to make another notable contribution in this field.

The courts have special functions to perform in the suppression of crime. The first of these is to enforce the laws impartially and justly. Incidental to this duty much original information comes to the judges of our courts, and it has been the policy of the Municipal Court to make public such incidental information, as the relationship between degeneracy and crime and their relationship to heredity, through the reports of its Psychopathic Laboratory. In the performance of this duty the Municipal Court of Chicago has pointed out the need of the permanent segregation of incorrigible defectives, which serves three purposes: First, the protection of society from the individual offender; second, the protection of the individual from himself, and, third, the restriction of propagation of the defective type due to heredity. The alternative to segregation is to continue to do what we have been doing, that is, incarcerate the offender for a time, more or less brief, and then permit him freedom to repeat his offense, and to propagate his kind.

Segregation is necessary, even though sterilization were invoked. Sterilization protects future generations, while segregation safeguards the present as well. The segregation of incorrigible defectives on farm colonies as a measure of crime prevention is urgently needed in the State of Illinois. However, in a number of states, fifteen up to the present time, experiments have been made with sterilization. The two theories of segregation and sterilization are not antagonistic, but both may be invoked.

With the intention of covering every phase of crime prevention, the Municipal Court of Chicago publishes this work as an important contribution to that cause.

We desire to make acknowledgment to the sculptor, Charles Haag, for the use of his “Fountain of the Ages,” to illustrate the significance of heredity and the continuity of the blood stream. Harry Olson, Chief Justice.

Preface
This volume is intended primarily for practical use. It is designed to be of particular service to four classes of persons: First, to law-makers who have to decide upon matters of policy to be worked out in legislation regulating eugenical sterilization; second, to judges of the courts, upon whom, in most of the states having sterilization statutes, devolves the duty of deciding upon the constitutionality of new statutes, and of determining cacogenic individuals and of ordering their sexual sterilization; third, to administrative officers who represent the state in locating, and in eugenically analyzing persons alleged to be cacogenic, and who are responsible for carrying out the orders of the courts; and fourth, to individual citizens who, in the exercise of their civic rights and duties, desire to take the initiative in reporting for official determination and action, specific cases of obvious family degeneracy.

The work is designed also as an historical record of the several types of activities which characterized the early days of modern eugenical sterilization, and of the later working out, through legislation, litigation, experimental administration and scientific research, of a conservative state policy in reference to eugenical sterilization as an aid in protecting the country’s family stocks from deterioration.

The facts here reported have been secured, and the analyses and principles here given have been worked out during the past ten years. The present study was begun by the author in 1911, as secretary of a committee appointed by the Eugenics Section of the American Breeders’ Association “to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means for Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the American Population.” Of this committee, Mr. Bleecker Van Wagenen was chairman. He reported a summary of the first year’s work to the First International Congress of Eugenics in London in 1912. In February, 1914, under the authorship of the secretary, it issued bulletins 10-a and 10-b of the Eugenics Record Office, entitled respectively, “The Scope of the Committee’s Work,” and “The Legal, Legislative and Administrative Aspects of Sterilization.”

The statistics reported in this work are brought down to January 1, 1921, and the legal records to January 1, 1922. Great care has been taken to insure completeness and accuracy of record and fact throughout the study, and an attempt has been made to cover the whole field of policy, legality and practice.

Thanks are due for hearty co-operation in securing the facts needed for this work, to the superintendents of the custodial institutions in which eugenical sterilizing operations have been performed, to state officials who willingly supplied copies of official records, to judges of the courts of law before whom seven sterilization statutes have been tested, to the attorneys-at-law who have generously given legal advice and opinions, to many physicians who have been consulted in reference to the medical aspect of the problem, to the scientific field investigators of the Eugenics Record Office, to surgeons who have furnished case-records of persons sexually sterilized, and to authors and publishers of the several text-books on anatomy and surgery who have kindly permitted quotations in reference to the technique of given sterilizing operations.

Besides these many persons who have so generously aided the investigations, special obligations are due to Dr. Charles B. Davenport, Director of the Eugenics Record Office, for many constructive suggestions and for constant encouragement throughout the investigations, and to Hon. Harry Olson, Chief Justice of the Municipal Court of Chicago, for kindly writing the foreword, for rendering an opinion on the legal aspects of sterilization, which appears as Section 1 of Chapter IX, and for publishing the whole of these studies under the auspices of the Psychopathic Laboratory of his court.

Harry Hamilton Laughlin. Cold Spring Harbor, Long Island, N. Y., January 1, 1922.”

(SOURCE: Laughlin, Harry Hamilton, Eugenical Sterilization in the Untied States, Psychopathic Laboratory of the Municipal Court of Chicago, 1922, Pages v-viii).

Definitions:
1. Salpingectomy – surgical excision of a fallopian tube.

2. Ovariotomies – surgical incision of an ovary. (Not sure if this procedure is the same as Oophorectomy – the surgical removal of an ovary, called also ovariectomy.)

3. Vasectomy – surgical division or resection of all or part of the vas deferens usually to induce sterility.
(SOURCE: Definitions by Dictionary and Thesaurus – Merriam-Webster Online: http://www.merriam-webster.com/).

4. Eugenics – is the applied science of the bio-social movement which advocates the use of practices aimed at improving the genetic composition of a population, usually a human population. It is a social philosophy which advocates for the improvement of human hereditary traits through the promotion of higher reproduction of more desired people and traits, and the reduction of reproduction of less desired people and traits.

5. Dysgenics (also known as Cacogenics) – is the study of factors producing the accumulation and perpetuation of defective or disadvantageous genes and traits in offspring of a particular population or species. Dysgenic mutations have been studied in animals such as the mouse and the fruit fly. The term dysgenics was first used as an antonym of eugenics – the social philosophy of improving human hereditary qualities by social programs and government intervention.
(SOURCE: Definitions by Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page)

1912-1920 Eugenics in New York State.

1920 Margaret Sanger & Eugenics.

1922 Eugenics – New York State.

Percy Crosby, FDR & Skippy Peanut Butter

Posted on by
2

A friend told me a disturbing story about a man named Percy Crosby who was committed to Kings Park State Hospital in January, 1949. I had never heard of Mr. Crosby but his story was intriguing. If everything that I have been able to discover in just a matter of days turns out to be true, then a heinous crime was committed against Mr. Crosby. The story is quite complicated and involves a number of people and government agencies. This is what I found.

Abandoned America TM – Matthew Christopher’s Autopsy of the American Dream

Percy Crosby was born on December 8, 1891, in Brooklyn, New York. He was an accomplished author and artist who spent the last sixteen years of his life locked up in Kings Park State Hospital, and died there on his 73rd birthday on December 8, 1964. According to Joan Crosby Tibbetts, daughter of Percy Crosby: “During his career as a celebrity American artist and author, Percy Crosby crusaded against corruption and stood up to the likes of Al Capone and his henchmen when American citizens were too frightened to speak out. He used his Irish humor and gift of satire to lampoon politicians, President Roosevelt, the Ku Klux Klan, and fought for civil liberties, child labor laws, rights of veterans, and freedom of the press. Although he made a profound impression with millions of Americans, primarily through Skippy, the loveable and mischievous cartoon character who became a household word, Percy Crosby was unable to prevent retaliation by those who coveted control of Skippy for their commercial gain, and wanted him silenced. Percy Crosby was falsely imprisoned in a New York mental hospital (KING’S PARK), for the last 16 years of his life, following years of harassment by the IRS. He referred to this period of his life as a “political witch hunt.” During this time, Crosby’s famous Skippy trademark and its valuable goodwill was pirated by a bankrupt peanut butter company, which later merged with a Fortune 500 company, making a fortune in illicit sales under the Skippy brand name.” (1)

Franklin D. Roosevelt

Franklin D. Roosevelt

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, nicknamed FDR, was the 32nd President of the United States who served from March 4, 1933, to April 12, 1945. He was born on January 30, 1882 in Hyde Park, New York, and died on April 12, 1945, in Warm Springs, Georgia. FDR won the presidency in November of 1932. In 1936, he was re-elected for a second term; 1940 third term; 1944 fourth term. The Twenty-Second Amendment of the United States Constitution was passed by The Congress on March 21, 1947, and was ratified on February 27, 1951. It set a two term limit (4 years per term, 8 years total), for the office of President of the United States.

So, what does FDR have to do with Percy Crosby?

According to political commentator, David Martin, in his December 10, 2006, piece entitled, Roosevelt’s Revenge: “In 1937 Crosby drew a political cartoon, entitled “Paying the Price”, showing the slain figure of Justice lying on the ground with a giant boot on her chest, captioned “One Man Rule”. Crosby sent copies of the cartoon to the Supreme Court and all members of Congress, which depicted Roosevelt’s attempt to “pack the Supreme Court” after its unanimous decision against the NRA. Roosevelt was reputedly furious, and already sensitive to public outrage at his “court packing” plan. The IRS claimed Skippy, Inc. was incorporated by Percy Crosby to evade taxes and filed liens for $47,000, which was published nationally and reported during congressional hearings on tax evasion. Crosby fought back with prominent newspaper ads denying liability, and Lord, Day & Lord filed protest briefs, to no avail. He was forced to discontinue his publications under “The Freedom Press”, which he founded in 1932, and had to sell valuable real estate at distress prices to pay the IRS debt and penalty fines. In 1939 his wife filed for divorce and took custody of the four young Crosby children. The bitter divorce proceedings were publicized to portray the creator of Skippy as selfish and cruel. The children never saw their father again.” (2)

Most of us have heard the famous quote, “It is better to let 100 guilty men go free than to imprison one innocent man.” As we have seen over and over again, this adage only applies to criminal law cases but was never applied to those unfortunate people who were unjustly labeled as mentally ill and incarcerated in state mental hospitals. You decide.

SOURCES:
1. The Life And Times Of Percy Crosby

2. Roosevelt’s Revenge by David Martin 12.10.2006

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES:

Skippy.com

David Martin (DCDave)

The “SKIPPY” Mystery by Collin Nash

Internet Archive – Would Communism Work Out in America? by Percy Crosby

Abandoned America TM – Matthew Christopher’s Autopsy of the American Dream

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Presidential Library and Museum

Dictatorship: The Road Not Taken

Whitehouse.gov – Franklin D. Roosevelt

SKIPPY Peanut Butter at peanutbutter.com

Bloomberg Business Week

1860 Susan B. Anthony

Posted on by
10

As I am always searching for historical articles concerning anything having to do with the nineteenth century perspective on mental illness, insane asylums, the patients, and any one who may have been involved, I was very pleased to find this particular passage from Eighty Years And More: Reminiscences 1815-1897 by Elizabeth Cady Stanton (1815-1902), involving Susan Brownell Anthony. After reading it, I wanted to know the specifics of the story, and I had to find out who the characters were. Being a life-long resident of Rochester, New York, I am proud to say that Miss Anthony was also a resident of this fine city from 1866 to 1906. She is one of America’s most famous, beloved, and inspirational women because of her strength, dedication, and undying tenacity for the cause of women’s rights. Miss Anthony was born on February 15, 1820 in Adams, Massachusetts, and died on March 13, 1906 in Rochester, New York. Her most famous quote is, “Failure is Impossible.”

Susan B. Anthony

Susan B. Anthony

Elizabeth Cady Stanton

Elizabeth Cady Stanton

“While all this was going on publicly, an equally trying experience was progressing, day by day, behind the scenes. Miss Anthony had been instrumental in helping a much abused mother, with her child, to escape from a husband who had immured her in an insane asylum. The wife belonged to one of the first families of New York, her brother being a United States senator, and the husband, also, a man of position; a large circle of friends and acquaintances was interested in the result. Though she was incarcerated in an insane asylum for eighteen months, yet members of her own family again and again testified that she was not insane. Miss Anthony, knowing that she was not, and believing fully that the unhappy mother was the victim of a conspiracy, would not reveal her hiding place.

Knowing the confidence Miss Anthony felt in the wisdom of Mr. Garrison and Mr. Phillips, they were implored to use their influence with her to give up the fugitives. Letters and telegrams, persuasions, arguments, and warnings from Mr. Garrison, Mr. Phillips, and the Senator on the one side, and from Lydia Mott, Mrs. Elizabeth F. Ellet, and Abby Hopper Gibbons, on the other, poured in upon her, day after day; but Miss Anthony remained immovable, although she knew that she was defying and violating the law and might be arrested any moment on the platform. We had known so many aggravated cases of this kind that, in daily counsel, we resolved that this woman should not be recaptured if it were possible to prevent it.

To us it looked as imperative a duty to shield a sane mother, who had been torn from a family of little children and doomed to the companionship of lunatics, and to aid her in fleeing to a place of safety, as to help a fugitive from slavery to Canada. In both cases an unjust law was violated; in both cases the supposed owners of the victims were defied; hence, in point of law and morals, the act was the same in both cases. The result proved the wisdom of Miss Anthony’s decision, as all with whom Mrs. P. came in contact for years afterward, expressed the opinion that she was, and always had been, perfectly sane. Could the dark secrets of insane asylums be brought to light we should be shocked to know the great number of rebellious wives, sisters, and daughters who are thus sacrificed to false customs and barbarous laws made by men for women.” (1)

The following article is reprinted from The Model Editions Partnership Historical Editions in the Digital Age, The Papers of Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, Copyright 1997. Rutgers University Press. All rights reserved.

“Phoebe Harris Phelps, wife of Charles Abner Phelps of Boston and the sister of prominent New York lawyers and politicians, approached SBA in Albany in December 1860 for help in her flight from her husband. On Christmas day SBA accompanied Phoebe Phelps and one daughter to New York City, where Abby Hopper Gibbons and the writer Elizabeth Ellet concealed the fugitives until they moved on to Philadelphia. Charles Phelps (1820-1902), who graduated from Union College in 1841 and Harvard Medical School in 1844, practiced medicine with his father. A successful political career began with election to the Massachusetts legislature in 1855. Meanwhile, his wife, who worked at the Albany Female Academy before her marriage, raised their three children and published several children’s books on religious themes. By her account, Charles Phelps became abusive and unfaithful before 1858, and when she confronted him, he committed her to the McLean Lunatic Asylum. After seventeen months of confinement, she got away to Albany. In one version she escaped; in another she was released to her brother’s home, and the flight to New York occurred after several months of disputes over visits with the children. In Philadelphia Phoebe Phelps supported herself by writing and sewing until, after ten months of safety, agents of her husband seized their daughter and returned her to Boston. Phoebe Phelps followed and with help from friends found a safe place from which to file for divorce. She published one more religious book in 1865. When Charles Phelps died in 1902, his obituary named his wife but said nothing more about her. Their daughters, both single, lived in Boston. SBA kept clippings about the case in her scrapbooks and identified the principals.” (2)

The following article is reprinted from Mothers on Trial: The Battle for Children and Custody by Phyllis Chesler.

“In 1860, the year Elizabeth Packard was psychiatrically imprisoned, Susan B. Anthony was visiting her friend Lydia Mott in Albany, New York. A disheveled and sobbing woman was admitted to the parlor. She was Mrs. Phelps, the wife of a Massachusetts state senator and a sister of a U.S. Senator. ‘Please won’t you help me? No one else will. I am a wife and mother. When I finally confronted my husband with proof of his adulteries, he beat me and had me put away in an Insane Asylum. My brother had me freed, but could not obtain permission for me to see my children. Yesterday, after a year, I was allowed to visit one child. I fled the state with her immediately. And now I am a fugitive.’

Anthony agreed to help Mrs. Phelps. She escorted her to New York City and obtained refuge for her there. State Senator Phelps threatened to have Anthony arrested during one of her public lectures. He also enlisted Anthony’s two most cherished abolitionist comrades, Garrison and Phillips, in his campaign against her.

Anthony’s comrades strongly believed that her action endangered the ‘women’s right’s movement and the anti-slavery cause.’ Anthony disagreed with them. She said, ‘Don’t you break the law every time you help a slave to Canada? Well the law which gives the father sole ownership of the children is just as wicked and I’ll break it just as quickly. You would die before you would deliver a slave to his master and I will die before I will give up the child to its father.’

Phelps hounded Anthony for more than a year. She remained firm. Finally, he hired detectives to locate his missing child. One Sunday morning, on her way to church, the young Miss Phelps was kidnapped on the street and ‘legally’ returned to her father.” (3)

Chapter XIII – Reforms and Mobs (Includes the origin of the word “bloomer”): Elizabeth Cady Stanton – Susan Brownell Anthony

Susan B. Anthony Grave, Mt. Hope Cemetery, taken by L.S. Stuhler 7.8.2001

Susan B. Anthony Grave, Mt. Hope Cemetery, taken by L.S. Stuhler 7.8.2001

SOURCES:
(1) Eighty Years And More: Reminiscences 1815-1897 by Elizabeth Cady Stanton (1815-1902) New York: T. Fisher Unwin, 1898, Chapter XIII. Reforms and Mobs.)

(2) The Papers of Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, ed. Ann D. Gordon, et al. (Columbia, S.C.: Model Editions Partnership, 1999). Electronic version based on The Papers of Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1997) Vol. 1, pp. 196-461. On the Web at http://mep.blackmesatech.com/mep/ [Accessed 21 July 2012] Copyright 1997. Rutgers University Press. All rights reserved.

(3) Chesler, Phyllis, Mothers on Trial: The Battle for Children and Custody, Second Edition, Chicago Review Press, 2011, pages 7-8.

Susan Brownell Anthony Obituary – New York Times

National Susan B. Anthony Museum & House, 17 Madison Street, Rochester, NY 14608

Possible Grave of Phoebe Harris Phelps – Find A Grave

Ira Harris – Find A Grave
Ira Harris may be the brother of Phoebe Harris Phelps. Mr. Harris served as the Senator from New York from March 4, 1861 to March 4, 1867.

Corinthian Hall, Rochester, New York

Other articles concerning Dr. and Mrs. Phelps state that when Mrs. Phelps confronted Dr. Phelps about his adultery, he threw her down the stairs and beat her. When she threatened to tell authorities, he locked her up in an insane asylum and would not allow her to see her children. She remained in the asylum for eighteen months. Mrs. Phelps brother, the Senator from New York, freed her but could not get permission for her to see or have custody of her children. She was finally allowed to see one child, a daughter. Dr. Phelps was a member of the Massachusetts House of Representatives in 1856, and served as a State Senator in 1858. -L.S.Stuhler

1855 Samuel Joseph May

Posted on by
Reply

I need to explain who Samuel J. May was because he was mentioned in a previous post about Miss Phebe B. Davis who wrote the pamphlet, Two Years and Three Months in the New York State Lunatic Asylum at Utica: Together with the Outlines of Twenty Years’ Peregrinations in Syracuse. Miss Davis believed that “Priest May” had a hand in having her committed to the State Lunatic Asylum at Utica sometime between 1848 and 1853. Davis stated, “I have given simply the outlines of what took me to the Lunatic asylum. S. J. May, the great woman’s rights man of Syracuse, pretended that he thought it would be a great benefit to my health; yet he knew all the time that I could take care of myself, if I had any thing to do it with, – and that is more than his women-folks can do, though they are rational, I suppose – for they will not cook their own food after it is given them, while I was obliged to work for what little I did have and then do my own cooking besides. But however, as I could not make a comfortable living by sewing, I thought it best to go, and the more readily, as I had heard so much said in commendation of the institution and of the kind treatment the patients received there. Still, notwithstanding all these good hear-says, as soon as I thought of going there, a feeling of suspicion crept into my mind, which I could not eradicate and did not, that all was not right in that Asylum, and this impression proved to be too true – it was not imaginary, but real.”

Samuel May will also be mentioned in my next post in which Susan B. Anthony helps a mother, with her child, escape from an abusive husband who had her committed to an insane asylum for eighteen months. This story is taken from the book Eighty Years And More: Reminiscences 1815-1897, Chapter XIII, Reforms and Mobs, by Elizabeth Cady Stanton.

Samuel J. May

Samuel J. May

Samuel Joseph May was born in the Boston area of Massachusetts on September 12, 1797, to Colonel Joseph and Dorothy (née Sewell) May. In 1825, he married Lucretia Flagge Coffin and had five children. He was a minister and an influential reformer during the nineteenth century who advocated for women’s rights, better education for children, and the abolition of slavery. He died July 1, 1871, in Syracuse, New York. Abigail “Abba” Alcott (née May) was the sister of Samuel May. Abigail and Amos Bronson Alcott were the parents of Louisa May Alcott who was an American novelist best known as the author of the novel Little Women which was based on her childhood and home life.

According to the Dictionary of Unitarian & Universalist Biography website: “Samuel Joseph May (September 12, 1797 – July 1, 1871), a Unitarian minister, was one of the greatest social and educational reformers of the nineteenth century. He advocated and organized on behalf of freedom and civil rights for blacks, emancipation and voting rights for women, and just rights for workers. Because he was many decades ahead of mainstream acceptance of the policies he fought for, he was often at odds with his ministerial colleagues, church members, and the public at large.”

“In 1845 May began his longest ministry, at the Church of the Messiah in Syracuse, New York. There, he came to understand the plight of women as similar to that of blacks. In his seminal address, the Rights and Condition of Women, 1846, he asked why ‘half of the people have a right to govern the whole.’ He became a familiar figure in the women’s rights movement, speaking at conventions and accepting committee roles, working closely with Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony. ‘Humanity is dual, and yet when perfected it is one,’ said May at the 1850 Woman’s Rights Convention in Worcester, Massachusetts. ‘A perfect character in either man or woman is a compound of the virtues of each.’”

“On the eve of the Civil War the atmosphere in Syracuse became ever more incendiary. In January 1861, when a major antislavery rally was to be held, May and Susan B. Anthony were threatened with violence by an angry crowd that stormed the building. The rally was cancelled, and the mob paraded through the streets of Syracuse with effigies of May and Anthony, finally burning them in the center of town.”

“As war approached, May reluctantly recognized that human rights could no longer be pursued without violent means. He ended by supporting the war, urging the government to prosecute it quickly, and pressing Lincoln to free the slaves. During the war, May did charitable work on behalf of soldiers and prisoners. After the war he campaigned for the rights of workers and championed welfare for the poor, rights for women, and the redistribution of wealth through a graduated income tax. Into his last years he maintained his support of black and female suffrage.”
SOURCE: All material copyright Unitarian Universalist History and Heritage Society (UUHHS) 1999-2013 From the biography of  Samuel Joseph May, written by Dennis Landis, in the Dictionary of Unitarian and Universalist Biography, an on-line resource of the Unitarian Universalist History & Heritage Society. Dictionary of Unitarian & Universalist Biography, All material copyright Unitarian Universalist Historical Society (UUHS) 1999-2012.

Port City Paranormal – The Ghosts Of Willard Asylum

Posted on by
9

To quote their website: Port City Paranormal is a team of investigators that, “is dedicated to finding answers to the age old mystery of what lies beyond the grave. We investigate and research unexplained phenomena that includes, but is not confined to; experiences of hauntings, EVP, apparitions, ghost sightings, and a broad range of altered realities.”

Port City Paranormal Logo

Port City Paranormal Logo

Port City Paranormal of Wilmington, North Carolina, was founded by Doug and Jane Anderson. In September 2008, and with the permission of the N.Y.S.D.O.C., they began investigating The Maples which was the first and oldest “cottage style” building that was constructed on the property in 1872. The team returned to Willard in March 2009, and began investigating The Branch, later renamed The Grandview, in 1904. According to the plaque that was placed on the building in 1960 by The New York State Agricultural Society and The Willard State Hospital, “This is the original building of The First State Agricultural College in the United States. Chartered April 15, 1853, Constructed 1859, In Operation 1860 – 61. Undone by war, it was transformed into Willard State Hospital in 1865, and reconstructed and reduced in size in 1886. Here, Ezra Cornell, a trustee, received the inspiration which became Cornell University.” Port City Paranormal also investigated Elliott Hall that was built in 1937.

Port City Paranormal - Willard Patients

Port City Paranormal – Willard Patients

According to the Port City Paranormal Team, “SWAT trainees bunking in Grandview and Elliott Hall, frequently report ghostly encounters and many refuse to stay in the buildings over night. Cell phones ring, keys repeatedly knocked to the floor, whispering, door knobs turning, screaming, and black shadows have been reported with every new class session.”

To read more about PCP’s extensive investigation of Willard State Hospital, please visit their website & blog!

Port City Paranormal

Port City Paranormal Blog

To learn more about The Willard Asylum for the Insane, buy my book:

The Inmates of Willard 1870 to 1900, A Genealogy Resource

1855 Miss Phebe B. Davis

Posted on by
8

Names of patients who were incarcerated at state insane asylums 72 years ago or more can be difficult to find; not because they aren’t there but because they are buried in old documents, records, and books. It is rare that one finds a first hand account of the experiences of a person who had lived to tell the story of being locked up at the state lunatic asylum. Miss Phebe B. Davis, wrote and published a pamphlet entitled TWO YEARS AND THREE MONTHS IN THE NEW-YORK STATE LUNATIC ASYLUM, AT UTICA: TOGETHER WITH THE OUTLINES OF TWENTY YEARS’ PEREGRINATIONS IN SYRACUSE, in 1855, with her own money. Her goal was to inform the public about the terrible abuses that were endured by the patients while in “the house.” I read her story with one hand over my mouth for many different reasons, and at times, I could be heard to say, “Oh, Jesus!” and “Oh my God!”

Davis Pamphlet 1855

Davis Pamphlet 1855

I have transcribed her pamphlet word for word and bolded the names of all the people she mentioned. This is what I meant in my book when I said: “To believe that all our ancestors were good, kind, law abiding citizens who were literate, owned their own homes, and held steady employment is unrealistic.” Some of our ancestors were down right mean!

The pamphlet is not an easy read since it was written 157 years ago, but all 64 pages are worth the effort. I knew that some words were printing errors but everything else I kept as originally written. If you have read my blog, you will already know Dr. Amariah Brigham and Dr. John P. Gray. In the coming days, I will do more research on Miss Davis, Dr. Benedict, Dr. Nichols, and Dr. Cook “Bub.”

1874 Dr. John B. Chapin

Posted on by
3

Just to be clear, I have never stated that insane asylums or state hospitals were great places to live; nor have I ever stated that I approve of the incarceration of people who live with a mental illness. I find the subject fascinating and disturbing at the same time, and only wish to share with you the historical views of the nineteenth century, and, on occasion, articles, books, movies, documentaries, photographs, and laws that pertain to the twenty-first century. Thank you for reading!

John Bassett Chapin, M.D., LL.D., was the first Medical Superintendent of The Willard Asylum for the Insane. I finally obtained a photograph of him from the American Antiquarian Society of Worcester, Massachusetts. I also found some articles of interest pertaining to Dr. Chapin from The New York Times.

John B. Chapin, M.D., LL.D.

John B. Chapin, M.D., LL.D.

1874 THE PROCEEDINGS

“In connection with the meeting of the Social Science Association, a conference of the Public Boards of Charities in the United States, at which Hon. John V.L. Pruyn, of Albany, presided, was held yesterday morning. There were present Dr. Nathaniel Bishop, New-York; William P. Letchworth, Buffalo; Samuel F. Miller, Delaware County, N.Y., Dr. Charles S. Hoyt, Albany; F.B. Sanborn, General Secretary; Dr. John B. Chapin, of Willard Asylum; Mrs. W.P. Leynde, Wisconsin; Mr. H.H. Giles, Wisconsin, and Mrs. M.R. Pretlee, Connecticut. Dr. Chapin read the following paper on “The Duty of the States Toward Their Insane Poor.”

 THE DUTY OF THE STATES TOWARD THEIR INSANE POOR –
VIEWS OF DR. JOHN B. CHAPIN.

Underlying the initial legislation pertaining to the insane is the apprehension of danger to person and property which may arise from their irresponsible condition. If it is conceded that the safety of the community requires the personal liberty of the insane should be restrained, it follows that an obligation rests upon the State to direct, in its sovereign capacity, that the restraint should be properly and humanely exercised, and the custodial care combined with such remedial measures as will afford the greatest probability of recovery, which the individual in his condition cannot direct intelligently for his advantage. The state of helplessness and dependence which insanity at once produces, excites commiseration and pity, and prompts to sympathetic impulses, which move a community to give them expression in legislative acts for the relief of persons thus unfortunately afflicted. It may be a question whether the exercise of legislative functions to accomplish humanitarian purposes comes strictly within the objects of a Government, when these legislative acts require for their full execution the collection of taxes for objects which it is not alleged will add to the prosperity financially of the State, or enhance appreciably the value of the property of its citizens. Illustrating this view, it may be observed in this connection that taxes for purposes purely benevolent in their character are among the last to be levied and paid with reluctance, while those provided for internal improvements are more freely, and, sometimes, even liberally, voted.

Our whole duty to the insane, as well as to all the dependent classes, may not appear from the nature and objects of human Governments, but it does appear when we consider and accept those higher principles which it was the province of the Divine Master and Teacher to inculcate, the practical application of which distinguishes Christian from pagan civilization.

If, then, the safety of society imposes a necessity of exercising a salutary control over the personal liberty of the insane, then those reciprocal obligations which exist and bind together the members of a community also require that the State should make special provision for the medical treatment and supervision of its insane poor, whose helplessness, dependent condition, and hope of recovery append to our sympathy and higher sense of duty, without which aid they must inevitably seek that last refuge – the refuge which the jail and almshouse afford.

The existing institutions for the care of the insane, whether corporate or erected under State auspices, may be regarded as a recognition of these obligations. If we examine the history of the early efforts to establish each one of these institutions, we will find they had their origin in the hope of improving the condition of the insane poor; that these efforts have been materially aided by “memorials,” petitions,” and official reports, representing the neglected condition of the insane in jails and almshouses, and that the favorable action of Legislatures has seemed to be the direct result of these representations.

In view of the many official recognitions of the claims of the insane poor, what becomes the duty of the States to this class?

Recognizing the fact that the sentiment of a community conforms itself to its written statutes, it is of the first importance that the State, in its sovereign capacity, should clearly define the legal status of an insane dependent in accordance with the principles we have stated. It should not be discretionary with a public officer, before whom a case is presented for action, to send an insane person to an asylum, or to an almshouse and jail. With such formalities as may be deemed requisite, there should be no discretion in the case, but the public officer should in unmistakable language be required by the statute to order the transfer of the insane dependent to a public asylum established and managed upon accepted and approved principles. The insane poor should be removed as far as possible while there, in all that pertains to their daily surroundings and maintenance, from the various baneful influences of political changes, and the mercenary economy which sometimes afflicts localities.

The State institutions should be held strictly to their originally-designed purpose, so that the class for which they were, and are, intended, should have the fullest benefit of the establishment, and not be excluded by any policy of internal administration.

In the earlier history of this subject it was usual to officially designate institutions for the insane as asylums, which conveyed to the popular sense the idea of permanent residence during a state of disability. Latterly it has been the practice of our Legislatures to create establishments for the insane under the name and style of hospitals, which would seem to serve the purpose of a medical idea. No exception ought to be taken to a name did it not come to subserve in practice the purpose of the idea that such institutions were places of temporary abode for patients who were ultimately to find an asylum or refuge elsewhere, when pronounced incurable. Having a firm conviction that this practice has depreciated the value and importance of asylums, we believe the State establishments should be called, and actually become to the insane, asylums or homes, and the practice of discharging and removing incurables to the almshouses be abandoned.

While great additions have been made to our knowledge of the nature of insanity, its proper medical and moral management, we must ask ourselves the question whether the present state of medical science will warrant us in believing the percentage of recoveries will increase. We must regard actual results, and not take counsel of our medical enthusiasm and hopes, and confess that official reports do not justify the belief that this percentage is increasing. This statement should not be made without acknowledging the fidelity and earnestness with which so many members of the profession are laboring in this department of medical research.

Would that we could realize the results that have been hoped for! Much as we love our profession and its noble offices, it is of more importance that the people of the several States be impressed with the results which actual experience develops, and prepared to discharge their whole duty to the large class of incurable insane persons who will remain a life-long public charge, as well as to the recent and curable cases.

To recognize the fact, as we must, that a small portions of the insane poor are well cared for in the existing State asylums, while the mass are provided for in the almshouses, is a sad commentary upon the existing system. To propose that we must erect more hospitals, when we are yearly struggling for appropriations to complete those we have commenced, or to keep those we have erected in a proper state of repair, does not solve the problem, but postpones it.

What our duty may be to the insane poor may be easy to determine for ourselves. If we would witness some results of a scheme of relief it must be adapted to the appreciation of the popular mind, to the pecuniary ability of tax-payers, and have the merit of comprehensiveness.

In reference to the disposition of recent cases with whom the hope of restoration mainly lies, no question can occur. There should be ample asylum accommodation prepared for their prompt treatment. The only question that we think can possibly arise is the proper disposition of the chronic and incurable cases. As we have before stated, it is our opinion that the discharge of incurables from the asylums should cease. We believe it is entirely feasible to attaché to all the asylums supplemental departments in which the tranquil and manageable cases can be made more comfortable than under an almshouse organization and on plans acceptable to tax-payers.

We believe great concessions may be made in the plans, style of architecture, and cost of construction of asylums, so that additional structures will be entered upon with less reluctance. It is not necessary that these structures should be built to endure for ages. It is quite possible and probable that the changes of a single generation may cause a departure from present plans to be highly desirable.

A word is necessary on the subject of the maintenance of the insane, and here, again, we are confronted with the financial aspect of the question. In those States where the expense of maintenance of the insane poor is a direct charge upon the counties or towns, there is a manifest reluctance, except in extreme cases, to transfer them to the State asylums, where the views as to their requirements differ, and the expense is greater than in the county poor-houses. We do not believe the differences which prevail on this point can be reconciled except by positive legislation.

In conclusion, we deem it of the highest importance that entire harmony should exist and be cultivated between the Boards of Public Charities of the several States and the medical profession as to the best policy to be pursued.

On motion, Mr. Sanborn, of Massachusetts; Mr. Giles, of Wisconsin, and Mr. Letchworth, of New-York, were appointed a committee to report a plan for unanimity of action as regards the treatment of the insane.”
SOURCE: Reprinted from The New York Times. Published: May 21, 1874, Copyright @ The New York Times. 

 1880 DISSCUSSING QUESTIONS OF INSANITY.

“PHILADELPHIA, May 27. – The members of the association of Medical Superintendents of American Institutions for the Insane reconvened this morning, in the third day’s session, with Clement A. Walker, Superintendent of the Insane Hospital of Boston, presiding. Previous to the convention being called to order, the Chairman presented to the members of the association Miss Dix, of Trenton, a lady well and favorably known for her extensive philanthropic disposition, having been instrumental in the establishment of a large number of institutions for the insane in America and Europe. Invitations to visit several public institutions were received. Dr. John B. Chapin, of Willard, N.Y., read a paper on “Experts and Expert Testimony in Cases of Insanity,” and the subject was discussed by Dr. Kempster, or Northern Wisconsin; MacDonald, of New-York City, and other members of the association. Dr. R. Gundry, Superintendent of the Maryland Hospital at Catonsville, Md., read a paper on “The Insanity of Critical or Transitional Periods of Life.” In the afternoon the members visited Girard College.”
SOURCE: Reprinted from The New York Times. Published: May 28, 1880, Copyright @ The New York Times.