NOTES

CHAPTER ONE

1. Hilda C. Standish, M.D., “Medical Report, Maternal Health Center Annual Meeting,” 15 June 1937, PPLC 39-C.

2. “Connecticut,” Birth Control Review, February-March 1937, p. 4; and “Connecticut,” Birth Control Review, June 1938, p. 104.

3. Bridgeport Times-Star, 18 April 1938, Bridgeport Post, 19 April 1938, and Bridgeport Telegram, 20 April 1938.

4. Sarah Clement Pease, “President’s Report,” 8 June 1939, PPLC 10-G.

5. Garrow conversations with Bice Clemow, Katharine H. Hepburn, Robert Hepburn, and Alfred M. Pease, Jr. Sallie Pease’s obituary appears in the Hartford Courant, 26 May 1983, p. B8.

6. Hartford Courant, 9 June 1939, p. 24; Waterbury Republican, 9 June 1939, p. 15.

7. The best starting point for an appreciation of Waterbury in the 1930s is Jeremy Brecher et al., Brass Valley: The Story of Working People’s Lives and Struggles in an American Industrial Region (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1982), esp. pp. 105, 215. A very valuable account of the Hayes trial and the political events leading up to it is Barbara A. C. Coyle, “The Waterbury Conspiracy Scandal of 1938: An Aberration in Connecticut State and Local Politics” (unpublished C.A.S. thesis, Wesleyan University, 1982). Also see Carl A. Lundgren et al., “Report of Extraordinary Grand Jury,” [19 May 1938], Stevenson Papers; Newsweek, 30 May 1938, p. 10; the subsequent Connecticut Supreme Court decision affirming the resulting convictions, State of Connecticut v. T. Frank Hayes et al. 127 Conn. 543 (4 March 1941); and Wilbur L. Cross, Connecticut Yankee: An Autobiography (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1943), pp. 378–395. Pape’s earlier efforts against the Hayes regime are reflected in Harry C. Post et al. v. Thomas F. Dillane et al., 119 Conn. 655 (Conn. Sup. Ct., 3 April 1935), State ex rel Pape v. John T. Derwin and Peter H. Dunais, 2 Conn. Supp. 60 (New Haven County Super. Ct., 19 June 1935), and State ex rel Pape v. Peter H. Dunais & John T. Derwin, 120 Conn. 562 (Conn. Sup. Ct., 3 December 1935). Other Waterbury histories include an early one by Pape himself, History of Waterbury and the Naugatuck Valley (Chicago: S. J. Clarke, 1918), and Cornelius F. Maloney et al., eds., Waterbury: A Pictorial History, 1674–1974 (Chester, CT: Pequot Press, 1974). On the Republican and American, an excellent source is Niver W. Beaman, Fat Man in a Phone Booth: Notes Off a Newspaperman’s Cuff (Chicago: Cloud, 1947); Beaman was a Republican reporter and editor from 1928 to 1939. On the Democrat, and its subsequent closing, see Editor & Publisher, 8 February 1947, pp. 9, 66–67. The Brecher volume can also be supplemented by Cecilia Bucki, Metal, Minds and Machine: Waterbury at Work (Waterbury: Mattatuck Historical Society, 1980), and by Deirdre M. Moloney, “Families, Work, and Social Institutions: A Comparative Study of Immigrants and Their Children in Waterbury, Connecticut, 1900–1920” (unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1989), esp. pp. 42–48. Rowland L. Mitchell, Jr., “Social Legislation in Connecticut, 1919–1939” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1954), pp. 16–19, provides an excellent overview of Connecticut immigration; additional sources, often focusing on Italian immigrants in New Haven, include David Rodnick, “Group Frustrations in Connecticut,” American Journal of Sociology 47 (September 1941): 157–166; Irvin L. Child, Italian or American? The Second Generation in Conflict (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1943); Samuel Koenig, “Ethnic Factors in the Economic Life of Urban Connecticut,” American Sociological Review 8 (April 1943): 193–197; Jerome K. Myers, “Assimilation to the Ecological and Social Systems of a Community,” American Sociological Review 15 (June 1950): 367–372; and Myers, “Assimilation in the Political Community,” Sociology and Social Research 35 (January-February 1951): 175–182.

8. Waterbury Democrat, 9 June 1939, p. 1, and 15 May 1939, p. 3. The front-page news story in Saturday’s (10 June) Democrat repeated Pease’s statement and observed that “Her remarks apparently indicated that it was a triumph for the league.”

9. Waterbury Republican, 10 June 1939, p. 2.

10. Waterbury American, 10 June 1939, p. 3. On Jeannie Heppel, who was then fifty-three years old and had been dispensary supervisor since 1919, see a 31 October 1954 Waterbury Republican profile marking her retirement, and her obituary in the 21 September 1962 Republican, p. 4. The Chase Dispensary building, designed by well-known architect Cass Gilbert, was constructed in 1923–1924.

11. Waterbury Democrat, 9 June 1939, p. 1; Parish Annual Reports, 1938, 1939, 1940, for St. Patrick’s, Immaculate Conception, Our Lady of Lourdes, Sacred Heart, and others, Archives of the Archdiocese of Hartford; Robert E. Shea, Saint Patrick’s Church, Waterbury, Connecticut (South Hackensack, NJ: Custombook, 1980); [George F. X. Reilly, ed.], The Story of 100 Years, 1847–1947 (Waterbury: Immaculate Conception Parish, 1947); Golden Jubilee, 1899–1949 (Waterbury: Our Lady of Lourdes Church, 1949); Waterbury Democrat, 29 April 1939, p. 12, 18 May 1939, pp. 1, 5, and 27 May 1939, p. 2; Moloney, “Families, Work, and Social Institutions,” pp. 42-48. Cryne obituaries appear in the Waterbury Republican, 9 September 1963, and the Catholic Transcript, 12 September 1963, p. 10. Cryne and John S. Kennedy were also undeniably well acquainted; see Waterbury Democrat, 10 October 1939, p. 5. On Kennedy, a Hartford native (b. 1909) who became associate editor of the Catholic Transcript immediately upon his ordination in 1935, and who later served as editor of the Transcript throughout the 1950s and 1960s, see the Hartford Courant, 13 November 1959, p. 4, and 11 January 1971, and the 26 May 1960 Transcript.

Copies of parish histories for additional Waterbury Catholic churches, including St. Thomas (1948), Sts. Peter and Paul (1970), Sacred Heart (1975), and St. Anne (1987) are also available at the Mattatuck Museum. An exceptionally valuable resource is Thomas S. Duggan (then Vicar-General of the Hartford Diocese), The Catholic Church in Connecticut (New York: States History Co., 1930), esp. pp. 375–400. Much less useful is Austin F. Munich’s brief pamphlet, The Beginnings of Roman Catholicism in Connecticut (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1935).

12. Garrow conversations with Father Robert E. Shea (St. Patrick’s) and Father Walter A. Vichis (Blessed Sacrament); Waterbury Republican, 12 June 1939, pp. 1, 3; Waterbury Democrat, 12 June 1939, p. 1; Catholic Transcript, 15 June 1939, p. 1.

13. Garrow conversations with Anthony Fitzgerald and William J. Secor, Jr.; Waterbury Republican, 12 June 1939, p. 1; Waterbury Democrat, 12 June 1939, p. 1.

14. Fitzgerald obituaries, Waterbury American, 2 December 1981, pp. 1, 5, and Waterbury Republican, 3 December 1981, p. 8; Waterbury American, 28 May 1968, p. 1; Lundgren et al., “Report of Extraordinary Grand Jury,” pp. 59–60.

15. Garrow conversations with Anthony Fitzgerald, William J. Secor, Jr., and J. Warren Upson; Hartford Courant, 3 June 1938, p. 1; Waterbury Republican, 8 June 1938; Lewis obituary, Waterbury Republican, 19 July 1965; New York Times, 3 September 1938.

16. Garrow conversations with J. Warren Upson, William J. Secor, Jr., and Anthony Fitzgerald; J. Warren Upson Interview (Brecher); Waterbury Democrat, 11 May 1939, p. 3; Waterbury Republican, 19 June 1939, p. 1.

17. Waterbury Republican, 12 June 1939, pp. 1, 3. Although unnamed in the story, the Hartford attorney was almost certainly Lucius F. Robinson, Jr.

18. Copies of Fitzgerald’s warrant application are in both the J. Warren Upson Papers and in the bound Connecticut Supreme Court Record and Briefs, State of Connecticut v. Certain Contraceptive Materials, #1780, January Term 1940, A-144, p. 173.

19. Waterbury Republican, 12 March 1961; Waterbury Democrat, 11 May 1939, p. 3; Garrow conversations with J. Warren Upson and William J. Secor, Jr.; Waterbury American, 19 February 1932, p. 7; Waterbury Republican, 23 November 1933. On McEvoy’s appointment to the bench, also see George E. Clapp, “The Kaiser of Connecticut,” American Mercury, June 1933, pp. 229–36, at 233.

20. Connecticut Supreme Court Record and Briefs, State of Connecticut v. Certain Contraceptive Materials, #1780, January Term 1940, A-144, p. 173ff; Waterbury Democrat, 12 June 1939, pp. 1, 4; Waterbury American, 12 June 1939, p. 1; Waterbury Republican, 13 June 1939, pp. 1, 3; Fitzgerald to J. Warren Upson, 28 June 1939, Upson Papers. Walter Smyth’s obituary appears in the Waterbury Republican, 5 August 1961, p. 2, and Albert S. Francis’s in the Republican, 20 November 1963, p. 2, and the American, 19 November 1963. On K. G. Alling, see Waterbury Democrat, 30 June 1939, p. 22.

21. Waterbury Democrat, 12 June 1939, p. 4; Garrow conversations with Katharine H. Hepburn, Robert H. Hepburn, Margaret Hepburn Perry, Ellsworth Grant, Hilda Crosby Standish, and Bice Clemow; West Hartford News, 20 September 1979; “Statement of Mrs. Clara McTernan,” 12 June 1939, p. 202, Upson Papers.

22. The best presently available source on the early political activities of Kit Hepburn is an early life biography of her daughter, based in part on family interviews: Christopher Andersen, Young Kate (New York: Henry Holt & Co., 1988), esp. pp. 44–45, 70, 102–05, 110–15, 163–64. Also valuable is Carole Nichols, “Votes and More for Women: Suffrage and After in Connecticut,” Women & History 5 (Spring 1983): 1–92, which is a revised version of Nichols’s “A New Force in Politics: The Suffragists’ Experience in Connecticut” (unpublished M.A. thesis, Sarah Lawrence College, 1979). A brief (4pp.) untitled autobiographical essay by Kit Hepburn, perhaps a draft of remarks for a speech, and apparently dating from c.14 September 1946, is also significant: Kitchelt Papers, 6–153, as is an impressive Official Program for a 2 May 1914 Votes for Women Pageant and Parade in Hartford, which also includes photos of all the Connecticut activists: Kitchelt Papers, 1–13. In addition to Garrow conversations with Katharine Hepburn, Robert H. Hepburn, and Margaret Hepburn Perry, firsthand family sources include Katharine’s autobiographical Me: Stories of My Life (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1991), esp. pp. 10, 19–21, 27; brief pieces by Katharine in the Hartford Times Sunday Magazine, 29 December 1968, pp. 3–6, and in Family Circle, 12 January 1982, pp. 64–65; Robert H. Hepburn to Barbara Ryden, 24 May 1983, PPLC 33-J; and two unpublished essays by the late Marion Hepburn Grant: “The Educated Housewife,” 29pp., 1977 (Connecticut Historical Society, Hartford), and “Mother Was a Suffragette,” 17pp., 21 October 1980, PPLC 24-S. Also useful—although modest conflicts about particular dates and events exist among some of these sources—are Carey E. Gross, “Katharine Houghton Hepburn ‘00,” Bryn Mawr Alumnae Bulletin, Fall 1984, pp. 6–7; obituaries of Katharine Hepburn in the New York Times, 18 March 1951, p. 90, the Hartford Courant, 18 March 1951, pp. 1, 2, and the Hartford Times, 19 March 1951, p. 26; Thomas Hepburn’s obituary in the Courant, 21 November 1962; Lupton A. Wilkinson and J. Bryan III, “The Hepburn Story” Saturday Evening Post, 29 November 1941, pp. 9–11, 89–92; Joseph S. Van Why, Nook Farm (Hartford: Stowe-Day Foundation, 1975); Hartford Courant, 8 November 1984, pp. F1, F2; and William J. Mann, “Hepburn: The Hartford Years,” Hartford Monthly, February 1990, pp. 26–31, 80. Also see David M. Roth, Connecticut: A Bicentennial History (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1979), p. 190, and Allan M. Brandt, No Magic Bullet (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985), p. 38. Less relevant biographies of Katharine the younger include Anne Edwards, A Remarkable Woman (New York: William Morrow & Co., 1985), pp. 27–38; Michael Freedland, Katharine Hepburn (London: W. H. Allen, 1984), pp. 1–11; and Gary Carey, Katharine Hepburn (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1983). Distinctly unreliable is Charles Higham, Kate: The Life of Katharine Hepburn (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1975). On Jo Bennett’s later life, see New York Times, 23 June 1954, p. 26; Nancy Cott, The Grounding of Modern Feminism (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987), pp. 65, 73; and Janice R. and Stephen R. MacKinnon, Agnes Smedley (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988), pp. 129, 256, 323.

23. Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing transcript, 27 February 1917, Connecticut State Library; Hartford Courant, 8 March 1917, pp. 8, 16, and 18 October 1917, p. 9; Nichols, “Votes and More,” esp. pp. 18–21, 36; Andersen, Young Kate, pp. 163–64; and Rosalind Rosenberg, Divided Lives: American Women in the Twentieth Century (New York: Hill & Wang, 1992), pp. 69–73. Also see Christine A. Lunardini, From Equal Suffrage to Equal Rights (New York: New York University Press, 1986), pp. 6–7, 19, 138, and David Morgan, Suffragists and Democrats: The Politics of Woman Suffrage in America (East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1972). On Connecticut’s ratification, see Edwin M. Dahill, Jr.’s superb “Connecticut’s J. Henry Roraback” (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1971), pp. 93–96.

24. Porritt’s late daughter, Marjory Nield Blackall, wrote an excellent twenty-one-page biographical essay, “The Story of Annie G. Porritt” (unpublished manuscript, 1976), Porritt Papers, Sophia Smith Collection. Also see Nichols, “Votes and More,” p. 8, and Annie Porritt, “Minutes,” Executive Committee, Connecticut Society for Social Hygiene, 14 January 1920, Winslow Papers, Box 77. Like her husband, Edward O. Porritt, who authored The Unreformed House of Commons (Cambridge University Press, 1909, 2 vols.) (and who died in 1921), Annie Porritt too was a published writer. See for example The Militant Suffrage Movement in England (New York: National American Woman Suffrage Association, n.d. [c.1912]), 14pp.; “When I Was Young,” The Independent, 25 June 1921, pp. 660–661, 677; and “Woman as a Metonymy,” The Independent, 16 June 1910, pp. 1324–26. About that latter piece an introductory editor’s note warned: “The theory propounded by Mrs. Porritt that man is the emotional sex is so novel that we considered it desirable to have it discussed by a competent authority and necessarily by a man,” Lester F. Ward.

25. Connecticut Journal of the House (23 January 1917), p. 129, notes the introduction of House Bill 221, “An act repealing Section 1327 of the General Statutes,” by Mr. Parsons of Enfield. Also see Journal of the Senate (24 January 1917), p. 173. A 1918 revision of the Connecticut code changed the section number to 6399, and a 1930 revision altered it to 6246. On Margaret Sanger, by far the best source is Ellen Chesler’s impressive Woman of Valor (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1992), esp. pp. 85–88, 97–99. On Anthony Comstock and the 1873 federal legislation he championed (17 Stat. 599), the traditional but now very-dated beginning point is Heywood Broun and Margaret Leech, Anthony Comstock: Roundsman of the Lord (New York: Albert & Charles Boni, 1927), esp. pp. 128–44; C. Thomas Dienes, Law, Politics, and Birth Control (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1972), esp. pp. 33–39, 56–73, is better informed. Also see Anna Louise Bates, “Protective Custody: A Feminist Interpretation of Anthony Comstock’s Life and Laws” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, State University of New York at Binghamton, 1991); Alvah W. Sulloway, Birth Control and Catholic Doctrine (Boston: Beacon Press, 1959), p. 3 (noting Comstock’s earlier 1869 success in the New York state legislature); Peter Fryer, The Birth Controllers (London: Seeker & Warburg, 1965), pp. 193–200; Paul S. Boyer, Purity in Print: The Vice-Society Movement and Book Censorship in America (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1968); Robert W. Haney, Comstockery in America (Boston: Beacon Press, 1960); David J. Pivar, Purity Crusade: Sexual Morality and Social Control, 1868–1900 (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1973); John T. Noonan, Jr., Contraception (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1965), pp. 412–13; and particularly John P. Harper, “Be Fruitful and Multiply: Origins of Legal Restrictions on Planned Parenthood in Nineteenth Century America,” in Carol R. Berkin and Mary Beth Norton, eds., Women of America (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1979), pp. 245–65, esp. at 260–64. A sophisticated recent examination of northeastern urban Comstockery is Nicola Beisel, “Class, Culture, and Campaigns Against Vice in Three American Cities, 1872–1892” American Sociological Review 55 (February 1990): 44–62. Additional congressional amendments added in 1897 (29 Stat. 512) and 1909 expressly forbid the interstate shipment or importation of contraceptive items. See Henry J. Abraham and Leo A. Hazlewood, “Comstockery at the Bar of Justice: Birth Control Legislation in the Federal, Connecticut, and Massachusetts Courts,” Law in Transition Quarterly 4 (December 1967): 220–45. The initial convictions under the Comstock statute appear to have been U.S. v. Bott & Whitehead, 24 Fed. 1204 (1873), and U.S. v. Foote, 25 Fed. 1140 (1876). See Helen I. Clarke, Social Legislation, 2nd ed. (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1957), pp. 173–76, and Norman E. Himes, Medical History of Contraception (Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1936), p. 277. Also see U.S. v. Popper, 98 Fed. 423 (1899).

26. Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 97–127; Linda Gordon, Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America (New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976), pp. 221–223; and Francis M. Vreeland, “The Process of Reform With Especial Reference to Reform Groups in the Field of Population” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1929), p. 60. Despite its odd title, the Vreeland dissertation is a substantial—578pp.—and impressive political history of birth control reform efforts in the years prior to 1927. It is essential reading for any serious student of the subject. Seemingly similar, but actually of very little substantive value, is Henrietta L. Bartleson, “The American Birth Control Movement” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Syracuse University, 1974); also note Rilma Buckman, “Social Engineering: A Study of the Birth Control Movement,” Social Forces 22 (May 1944): 420–428. Even lengthier—759pp.—than Vreeland is Mary Jane Huth, “The Birth Control Movement in the United States” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, St. Louis University, 1955), in whose view “Many of the leaders of the American Birth Control Movement during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were recruited from radical and psychopathic elements in the population—feminists, socialists, freethinkers, and sex reformers” (p. 32).

On the pamphlet, see Joan M. Jensen, “The Evolution of Margaret Sanger’s Family Limitation Pamphlet,” Signs 6 (Spring 1981): 548–555, and Lynne Masel-Walters, “For the ‘Poor Mute Mothers’?—Margaret Sanger and The Woman Rebel,” Journalism History 11 (Spring/Summer 1984): 3–10, 37. Also see Sanger’s own My Fight For Birth Control (New York: Farrar & Rinehart, 1931), pp. 91–95, as well as Sanger’s Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1938), pp. 118–122.

27. David M. Kennedy, Birth Control in America: The Career of Margaret Sanger (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1970), pp. 72–73, 80; Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 109, 126–131, 138–140; Gordon, Woman’s Body, pp. 227–228; James Reed, The Birth Control Movement and American Society: From Private Vice to Public Virtue, rev. ed. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983), pp. 90–98; Madeline Gray, Margaret Sanger (New York: Richard Marek, 1979), pp. 114–119; Lawrence Lader, The Margaret Sanger Story (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co., 1955), pp. 83, 94–95; Survey, 25 September 1915, p. 567. Also see Sanger’s own My Fight For Birth Control, pp. 119–126, and Sanger’s Autobiography, pp. 176–189. Contrary to Sanger’s statement in the Autobiography (p. 188), and once in Connecticut (Hartford Courant, 3 June 1937, p. 8) that Katharine Houghton Hepburn attended the January 1916 dinner (and that she and Hepburn had known each other as children in Corning, New York), the best present evidence indicates that Hepburn and Sanger first met only in Hartford in early 1923. See “Pioneers in Birth Control to Observe 25th Anniversary,” Hartford Times, 16 October 1941.

In addition to the Chesler, Gordon, Reed, Kennedy, Gray and Lader biographies cited above, the literature on Margaret Sanger is quite extensive, and sometimes combative. Gloria and Ronald Moore, Margaret Sanger and the Birth Control Movement: A Bibliography, 1911–1984 (Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1986), is comprehensive for its time period. Also see Emily T. Douglas, Margaret Sanger (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1970); Joan Dash, A Life of One’s Own: Three Gifted Women and the Men They Married (New York: Harper & Row, 1973), pp. 1–113; Sheila M. Rothman, Woman’s Proper Place (New York: Basic Books, 1978), pp. 188–209; and, generally, June Sochen, The New Woman: Feminism in Greenwich Village, 1910–1920 (New York: Quadrangle Books, 1972). An excellent undergraduate thesis on Sanger, by her grandson, is Alexander C. Sanger, “Margaret Sanger: The Early Years, 1910–1917” (unpublished B.A. thesis, Princeton University, 1969). Other useful theses include Robert W. Mack, “Margaret Sanger and the Crusade for Birth Control” (unpublished B.A. thesis, Princeton University, 1962); Susan A. Nicholson, “Margaret Sanger: Rebellion and Respectability” (unpublished M.A. thesis, Smith College, 1973); and Elizabeth S. Wood, “Margaret Sanger: The Making of a Crusader” (unpublished B.A. thesis, Princeton University, 1991).

Essays that express varied, although often critical, opinions concerning the Kennedy, Reed, and/or Gordon books include Constance Lindemann, “Margaret Sanger and the Birth Control Movement,” Women & Health 3 (1978): 12–21; Nancy F. Cott, “Abortion, Birth Control, and American Public Policy,” Yale Review 67 (Summer 1978): 600–605; Harriet B. Presser, “Birth Control and the Control of Motherhood,” Family Planning Perspectives 10 (November-December 1978): 374–376; David M. Kennedy, “Decrease and Stultify: Contraception and Abortion in American Society,” Reviews in American History 7 (March 1979): 18–25; Elizabeth Fee and Michael Wallace, “The History and Politics of Birth Control,” Feminist Studies 5 (Spring 1979): 201–215; Ann J. Lane, “The Politics of Birth Control,” Marxist Perspectives 2 (Fall 1979): 160–169; Mary P. Ryan, “Reproduction in American History,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 10 (Autumn 1979): 319–332; Dorothy Wardell, “Margaret Sanger: Birth Control’s Successful Revolutionary,” American Journal of Public Health 70 (July 1980): 736–742; James Reed, “Public Policy on Human Reproduction and the Historian,” Journal of Social History 18 (Spring 1985): 383–398; and Esther Katz, “The History of Birth Control in the United States,” Trends in History 4 (1988): 81–101. Also see Dorothy Green and Mary-Elizabeth Murdock, eds., The Margaret Sanger Centennial Conference [1979] (Northampton, MA: Smith College, 1982), esp. p. 46; the Journal of Social History 11 (Fall 1978): 269–273, and 12 (Fall 1978): 173–177, and Signs 4 (Summer 1979): 804–808. An extensive evaluation of Chesler’s Woman of Valor is Daniel J. Kevles, “Sex Without Fear,” New York Times Book Review, 28 June 1992, pp. 1, 34–35.

28. Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 140–42, 171; Gordon, Woman’s Body, pp. 228–229; Vreeland, “The Process of Reform,” pp. 388–391. The initial organizing of the Allison defense group is documented in multiple 1916 meeting minutes in the PPLM Papers, Box 25. Informative stories include The Masses, September 1916, p. 15, and J. Prentice Murphy, “The Allison Case,” Survey, 9 December 1916, pp. 266–267. An excellent retrospective overview of the early Massachusetts developments is Cerise Carman Jack, “Massachusetts” Birth Control Review 2 (April 1918): 7–8; also see Diane McCarrick Gieg’s valuable “The Birth Control League of Massachusetts, 1916–1940” (unpublished B.A. thesis, Simmons College, 1973), pp. 14–57. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s affirmation of Allison’s conviction is Commonwealth v. Allison, 227 Mass. 57, 116 N.E. 265 (25 May 1917).

29. Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 143–145, 150; and Sanger, “Clinics, Courts and Jails,” Birth Control Review, April 1918, pp. 8–9. On the Connecticut bill, the minimal surviving state legislative records indicate that there may have been a hearing on the measure on the afternoon of 8 March 1917, but if so, no Connecticut newspapers noted it. Following unfavorable committee reports (which, if actually written, also do not survive), both the House, on March 9, and the Senate, on March 17, rejected the bill. Journal of the House, p. 694; Journal of the Senate, p. 735. That April 1918 issue of the Birth Control Review, in a list of American birth control centers, included Henry F. Fletcher, Room 422, 647 Main Street, Hartford, but no evidence suggests that this was anything more than Fletcher’s office.

30. Elizabeth Stuyvesant, “The Brownsville Birth Control Clinic,” Birth Control Review, March 1917, pp. 6–8; Jonah J. Goldstein, “The Birth Control Clinic Cases,” Birth Control Review, February 1917, p. 8; and People of the State of New York v. Byrne, 163 N.Y. Supp. 680, 681 (5 December 1916). Also see Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 150–152; Lader, Margaret Sanger, pp. 107–115, Gray, Margaret Sanger, pp. 126–27; Douglas, Margaret Sanger, pp. 105–110; and Sanger’s My Fight, pp. 152–160, and her Autobiography, pp. 213–223. On Goldstein, see his obituary, New York Times, 23 July 1967, p. 60, and National Cyclopedia of American Biography, p. 256; Goldstein’s extensive 1965 interview with the Columbia University Oral History Program unfortunately does not discuss this lower court litigation.

31. Goldstein, “The Birth Control Clinic Cases”; People of the State of New York v. Byrne, 163 N.Y. Supp. 682, 684 (3 February 1917); Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 152–158; Lader, Margaret Sanger, pp. 127–137; and Sanger’s My Fight, pp. 169–184, and her Autobiography, pp. 224–237. A full transcript of Margaret’s trial appears at pages 7 through 91 of the case’s formal printed record, in the U.S. Supreme Court file, Sanger v. People of the State of New York, O.T. 1917 #945, National Archives, RG 267, File #26412, Box 7093.

32. Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 158–60; People of the State of New York v. Sanger, 179 App. Div. 939 (31 July 1917); People v. Sanger, 222 N.Y. 192 (8 January 1918); Jack H. Hudson, “Birth Control Legislation,” Cleveland-Marshall Law Review 9 (May 1960): 245–257, at 246–247; Dienes, Law, Politics, and Birth Control, p. 87; Sanger v. People File, U.S. Supreme Court, n. 31 above; and Sanger v. People, 251 U.S. 537 (17 November 1919). As Sanger herself later wrote, “The decision in question would have been more thoroly [sic] and widely called to the attention of the medical profession had we not hoped that by an appeal to the United States Supreme Court to gain even a greater advantage.” “The Legal Right of Physicians to Prescribe Birth Control Measures,” American Medicine 15 (June 1920): 321–323. Also see Lader, Margaret Sanger, pp. 148–149; Sanger’s Autobiography, pp. 238–250; and Goldstein’s recollection of the 1919 Supreme Court oral argument at pp. 81–83 of his 1965 interview with Douglas Scott of the Columbia Oral History Program.

33. Kennedy, Birth Control in America, pp. 220–221; Mary Ware Dennett, Birth Control Laws (New York: Frederick H. Hitchcock, 1926), pp. 94–95; Sanger, “How Shall We Change the Law,” Birth Control Review, July 1919, pp. 8–9; Jensen, “The Evolution of Margaret Sanger’s Family Limitation Pamphlet,” pp. 554–555.

34. Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 200–205; Hartford Courant, 15 November 1921, p. 10; New Republic, 30 November 1921, p. 9. Also see Vreeland, “The Process of Reform,” pp. 132–135; Lader, Margaret Sanger, pp. 172–185; Gray, Margaret Sanger, pp. 171–174; and Sanger’s My Fight, pp. 212–237, and Autobiography, pp. 301–315. Also see Annie G. Porritt, “Publicity in the Birth Control Movement,” in Report of the 5th International Neo-Malthusian and Birth Control Conference (London), 14 July 1922, pp. 301–307, at 304, who observed that “the opponents did the maximum of service to the movement.… Persecution furnishes perhaps the very best publicity.”

35. “Minutes of the First Annual Meeting of the American Birth Control League,” 12 January 1922, PPFA Box 1; Hartford Courant, 9 October 1922, p. 2, and 10 October 1922, p. 1; Chesler, Woman of Valor, p. 236; ABCL “Organization Department Report,” n.d.; Annie Porritt, “Minutes,” Second Annual Meeting, ABCL, 11 January 1923, PPFA Box 1; and Laws on Birth Control in the U.S.A. (New York: ABCL, 1924), pp. 3–4, Porritt Papers, Box 2. Additional 1922 ABCL board of directors meeting minutes—for 12 April, 10 May, 22 May, 5 June, 3 November, and 13 December—all further detail Day and Porritt’s participation. Also see Anne Kennedy, “Report of Executive Secretary, American Birth Control League,” 1922, p. 5, PPFA Box 1.

36. Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 226, 232–233, 274; Kennedy, Birth Control in America, pp. 182, 222; Connecticut Journal of the House, p. 224, and Journal of the Senate, p. 285. A copy of House Bill 504 is in the 1923 Connecticut General Assembly Records (RG 2), Box 78.

37. Dienes, Law, Politics, and Birth Control, pp. 43–47; Carol F. Brooks, “The Early History of the Anti-Contraceptive Laws in Massachusetts and Connecticut” (unpublished M.A. thesis, Brown University, 1964), pp. 18–27, 49–52; Brooks, “The Early History of the Anti-Contraceptive Laws in Massachusetts and Connecticut,” American Quarterly 18 (Spring 1966): 3–23; Stephen D. Howard, “The Birth Control Law Conflict in Massachusetts” (unpublished B.A. thesis, Harvard University, 1959), pp. 3–8; Catherine Jackson Tilson to J. Warren Upson, 30 June 1939, Upson Papers; 1879 Connecticut Journal of the Senate, pp. 236, 294, 317, 339, 414, 449 and 586; Journal of the House, pp. 271, 333, 488, 548, 576 and 594; Hartford Courant, 19 March, 20 March, 21 March, and 27 March 1879; and Joseph F. Brodley and Edwin D. Etherington, “Contraception: Human Right or Criminal Deviation?” (unpublished paper, Yale Law School, 25 May 1950) [PPLC 4-M and N], who observe (p. 6): “We know almost nothing about its passage.”

The Brooks thesis, pp. 22–27, contains a thorough exegesis and analysis of the legislative language, and correctly raises the clear but unanswerable question of whether the precise wording of the final statute resulted from the possibility that “an extra ‘use’ was unintentionally included” when the substitute bill was prepared. Neither Neil Harris, Humbug: The Art of P. T. Barnum (Boston: Little, Brown, 1973), esp. pp. 186–189 and 196–201, nor A. H. Saxon, P. T. Barnum: The Legend and the Man (New York: Columbia University Press, 1989), esp. pp. 247–273, at 270–273, refer to Barnum’s involvement in this story. Barnum previously had served in the 1865, 1866, and 1878 legislatures, and in 1875–1876 had been mayor of Bridgeport. Saxon (pp. 270–271) reports that Barnum’s principal 1879 legislative focus was opposing capital punishment. Also see the most reliable edition of Barnum’s much-amended and reprinted autobiography, George S. Bryan, ed., Struggles and Triumphs, 2 vols. (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1927), esp. pp. 731–732 and 734, as well as Harvey W. Root, “Barnum as Legislator,” Harper’s, September 1926, pp. 465–475 (which focuses almost exclusively on the 1865 session); Root, The Unknown Barnum (New York: Harper & Bros., 1927), esp. pp. 200–202; M. R. Werner, Barnum (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1923); and Irving Wallace, The Fabulous Showman: The Life and Times of P. T. Barnum (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1959), esp. pp. 260–262.

38. Hartford Courant, 12 February 1923, pp. 1, 2; Hartford Times, 12 February 1923, p. 6; and Sanger, “Address at Parsons Theatre,” 11 February 1923, 31pp., Sanger-LC Box 202, esp. p. 31, which apparently is a transcription from some type of recording, and includes only the formal speech, and not the ensuing question and answer period described in the press coverage. Also see Sanger’s Autobiography, pp. 293–294, and Joan M. Gaulard, “Woman Rebel: The Rhetorical Strategies of Margaret Sanger and the American Birth Control Movement, 1912 to 1938” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University, 1978), pp. 98–100.

39. “Pioneers in Birth Control to Observe 25th Anniversary,” Hartford Times, 16 October 1941; Hartford Times, 13 February 1923, p. 25, and 14 February 1923, p. 17; Hartford Courant, 14 February 1923, pp. 1, 2; New Haven Journal-Courier, 14 February 1923, pp. 1, 4; New York Times, 14 February 1923, p. 8; “The Hearing at Hartford,” Birth Control Review, March 1923, pp. 63–64. The obituary for Butler, later the United States Attorney for Connecticut (1934–1945), appears in the Courant, 8 February 1971.

40. Connecticut Journal of the House, p. 826 (21 March), and Journal of the Senate, p. 832 (23 March); Hartford Courant, 21 March 1923, p. 1; Hartford Times, 21 March 1923, p. 1. For an overview of the 1923 legislative session, see Dahill’s valuable “J. Henry Roraback,” which terms it “not particularly noteworthy” (p. 169). Also see Lane W. Lancaster, “Rotten Boroughs and the Connecticut Legislature,” National Municipal Review 13 (December 1924): 678–683; and Don C. Seitz, “Connecticut: A Nation in Miniature,” The Nation, 18 April 1923, pp. 461–464.

41. Birth Control Herald [Voluntary Parenthood League], 30 January 1924; U.S. Congress, Cummins-Vaile Bill—Joint Hearings Before the Subcommittee of the Committees on the Judiciary, 68th Cong., 1st sess., 8 April and 9 May 1924 (U.S. GPO Serial 38, 1924), 79pp.; Dennett, Birth Control Laws, pp. 294–298; Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 232–233; Annie Porritt, “Minutes,” ABCL Board of Directors, 27 November 1923, Porritt Box 2; Porritt, “Minutes,” ABCL Third Annual Meeting, 10 January 1924, PPFA Box 1; “Birth Control and Federal Legislation,” Birth Control Review, March 1924, pp. 68–69; and Porritt to Dennett, 18 June 1924, as well as Dennett to Porritt, 19 June 1924, Dennett Papers 16–287.

42. Chesler, Woman of Valor, p. 229; Connecticut Journal of the Senate, pp. 276 (30 January) and 692 (18 March), and Journal of the House, pp. 388 (3 February) and 763 (20 March); Annie Porritt, “Minutes,” ABCL Board of Directors, 9 February 1925, Porritt Papers, Box 2; Hartford Courant, 12 March 1925, p. 6, 13 March 1925, p. 1, and 19 March 1925, p. 11; Hartford Times, 12 March 1925, p. 2, and 13 March 1925, p. 39; New Haven Journal-Courier, 13 March 1925, pp. 1, 3; Meriden Journal, 18 March 1925; “Report of Anne Kennedy, Executive Secretary, for 1925,” ABCL Papers, Houghton Library, Box 11; Louise H. Fisher File, Hartford Courant Library. Prior to Hepburn’s role at the hearing, the ABCL’s top staffer had worried to Mrs. Day that it was “discouraging” that Hepburn “has shown so little response to anything.” Kennedy to Day, 1 December 1924, ABCL Papers, Houghton, Box 3. Dahill, “J. Henry Roraback,” p. 188, describes 1925 as “a very steady and unexciting legislative session.”

43. Day to Kennedy, 3 [January] 1926, Kennedy to Day, 6 January 1926, Fletcher to Kennedy, 19 January 1926, Kennedy to Fletcher, 25 January 1926, Fletcher to Kennedy, 27 January 1926, and Kennedy to Fletcher, 1 February 1926, ABCL Papers, Houghton, Box 7; ABCL schedule documents for January 1926, PPFA Box 33; Chesler, Woman of Valor, p. 233; Kennedy, Birth Control in America, p. 102.

44. Vreeland, “The Process of Reform,” pp. 150–160, 441, 517; Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 236–238, 278; Porritt to Penelope B. P. Huse, 20 January 1927 and 1 February 1927, and Porritt to Anne Kennedy, 15 April 1926, ABCL Papers, Houghton, Boxes 8 and 6; Connecticut Journal of the Senate, pp. 126 and 673 (25 January and 17 March 1927); Journal of the House, pp. 214 and 743–744 (26 January and 22 March 1927); New Haven Journal-Courier, 10 March 1927, p. 2; and Hartford Courant, 10 March 1927, p. 10, and 20 March 1927, p. 18. Dahill, “J. Henry Roraback,” p. 194, characterizes the 1927 legislative session as “orderly and unspectacular.” The House that year had 237 Republicans and only 25 Democrats; the Senate thirty-four Republicans and one Democrat. Lane W. Lancaster, “The Background of a State ‘Boss’ System,” American Journal of Sociology 35 (March 1930): 783–798, at 795.

Another bill that stopped short of the repeal called for by Senate Bill 145, House Bill 105, was introduced by Representative Bridge of Enfield, and was similarly rejected by the Judiciary Committee and by both the House and the Senate. Journal of the House, pp. 137 and 713 (20 January and 17 March 1927); Journal of the Senate, pp. 135 and 711–712 (25 January and 22 March 1927). Neither the legislative records nor any surviving correspondence, nor any newspaper stories, shed any light on why this second bill also was introduced and what relationship to it the Connecticut women or Henry Fletcher may have had. Almost three years later, however, Katharine Beach Day, in a 19 November 1929 report on the Connecticut League to an ABCL National Birth Control Conference, with apparent reference to the type of doctors-only reform bill that had been put forward in 1925, explained that “We found much opposition to this bill, even in the medical profession, and our doctor friends advised a simple repeal.” “Report for Conference, Connecticut Birth Control League,” PPFA Box 36.

45. Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 237–241; Kennedy, Birth Control in America, pp. 103–105; Porritt to Jones, 21 September 1928, Porritt, “Minutes,” ABCL Board of Directors, 14 February and 16 March 1928, Heck to Porritt, 14 July and 22 July 1928, Grace R. Adkins to Katharine Beach Day, 21 July 1928, Penelope B. P. Huse to S. R. Colladay, 17 May 1928, Huse to Porritt, 6 October 1928, ABCL Connecticut Branch form letter, 15 September 1928, Evelyn Rice to Porritt, 29 October 1928, and Reverend T. F. Rutledge Beale to Porritt, 9 November 1928, all in Porritt Box 2; Penelope B. P. Huse, “Report of Executive Secretary,” 13 November 1928, and Katharine Beach Day, Connecticut Birth Control League Annual Report, 16 January 1930, PPFA Box 1. Also see Sanger’s My Fight, pp. 329–335, and Autobiography, pp. 392–397, and, generally, Helena H. Smith, “Birth Control and the Law,” The Outlook, 29 August 1928, pp. 686–687, 718. The Konikow case events and effects are richly documented by a variety of materials in PPLM Box 25; also see Gieg, “The Birth Control League of Massachusetts,” pp. 58–63.

46. Katharine B. Day, Connecticut Birth Control League Annual Report, 16 January 1930, PPFA Box 1; Day to Katherine Seymour Day, 27 December 1928, Day Papers; Hepburn to Sanger, 13 February 1929, and Sanger to Hepburn, 23 February 1929, Sanger-LC Box 135; Hartford Times, 28 February 1929, p. 1; New Haven Journal-Courier, 1 March 1929, pp. 1, 2, 5; Hartford Courant, 1 March 1929, pp. 1, 2.

47. Hartford Courant, 6 March 1929, pp. 1, 4, 7 March 1929, p. 11, 9 March 1929, p. 3, 13 March 1929, pp. 1, 14, and 14 March 1929, p. 17; Journal of the Senate, pp. 103 and 577 (23 January and 6 March); Journal of the House, pp. 152, 634–635, and 663–664 (24 January, 8 March, and 12 March); Hartford Times, 12 March 1929, pp. 1, 20; New Haven Journal-Courier, 13 March 1929, p. 6; Katharine Beach Day, “Report for Conference; Connecticut Birth Control League,” 19 November 1929, and CBCL Annual Report, 16 January 1930, PPFA Boxes 36 and 1; Peck obituaries in Waterbury Republican, 30 October 1938, pp. 1, 4, and Yale University Obituary Record, 1937–1940, pp. 277–278. Dahill’s unpublished “J. Henry Roraback,” which is without a doubt the most informative Connecticut political history for this period, says that the 1929 session “set a high mark for efficiency” (p. 207). Another almost equally valuable source, similarly unpublished, is Mitchell’s “Social Legislation in Connecticut, 1919–1939,” esp. pp. 57–95. The partisan imbalance in the Connecticut legislature in the 1920s is best covered in three articles by Lane W. Lancaster: “The Background of a State ‘Boss’ System” (n. 44 above), “Rotten Boroughs and the Connecticut Legislature” (n. 40 above), and “The Democratic Party in Connecticut,” National Municipal Review 17 (August 1928): 451–455. Valuable survey accounts of Connecticut in the 1920s are Albert E. Van Dusen, Connecticut (New York: Random House, 1961), pp. 279–290; and Herbert F. Janick, Jr., A Diverse People: Connecticut 1914 to the Present (Chester, CT: Pequot Press, 1975), pp. 32–37.

48. Katharine Beach Day, “Report for Conference, Connecticut Birth Control League,” 19 November 1929, and CBCL Annual Report, 16 January 1930, PPFA Boxes 36 and 1; New York Times, 16 April 1929, p. 31, 19 April 1929, p. 27, 20 April 1929, p. 21, 21 April 1929, p. I-9, 23 April 1929, p. 3, 25 April 1929, p. 31, 26 April 1929, p. 13, 12 May 1929, pp. 1, 15, and 15 May 1929, p. 20; “The Raid,” Birth Control Review, May 1929, p. 139; Hannah M. Stone, “The Birth Control Raid,” Eugenics 2 (August 1929): 1–4; Sanger, “The Birth Control Raid,” New Republic, 1 May 1929, pp. 305–306; Ernst, A Love Affair with the Law (New York: Macmillan, 1968), pp. 131–132; Ernst and Gwendolyn Pickett, Birth Control in the Courts (New York: Planned Parenthood Federation of America, 1942), pp. 15–17; Dudley Nichols, “Sex and the Law,” The Nation 128 (8 May 1929): 552–554; Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 282–283; Kennedy, Birth Control in America, p. 224; Lader, Margaret Sanger, pp. 254–262. Also see Sanger’s My Fight, pp. 318–326, and Autobiography, pp. 402–408. See as well William J. McWilliams, “Laws of New York and Birth Control,” Birth Control Review 14 (February 1930): 46–47, 61–63; and Alexander Lindey, “Change the New York Law,” Birth Control Review 14 (March 1930): 79–80. On Hannah Stone, see the memorial tributes in Human Fertility 6 (August 1941): 108–113.

49. “The Raid,” Birth Control Review 13 (June 1929): 154–155; Patrick J. Ward, “The Catholics and Birth Control,” New Republic, 29 May 1929, pp. 35–38, at 35; Sanger, “The Next Step,” Birth Control Review 13 (October 1929): 278–279. Also see A New Day Dawns for Birth Control (New York: National Committee on Federal Legislation, 1937), p. 16; Reed, Birth Control Movement, p. 120; Ernst, The Best Is Yet … (New York: Harper & Bros., 1945), pp. 252–253; William M. Morehouse, “The Speaking of Margaret Sanger in the Birth Control Movement from 1916 to 1937” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Purdue University, 1968), p. 148; Helena H. Smith, “They Were Eleven,” New Yorker, 5 July 1930, pp. 22–25; Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 233–234, and Dorothy D. Bromley, “The Question of Birth Control,” Harper’s, December 1929, pp. 35–45.

50. Ida H. Timme to Hepburn, 11 October 1929, Hepburn to Timme, 17 October 1929, Sanger to Hepburn, 19 October 1929, Hepburn to Sanger, 21 October 1929, Sanger to Hepburn, 23 October 1929, Timme to Hepburn, 24 October 1929, Sanger to Hepburn, 6 November 1929, Hepburn to Sanger, 9 November 1929, Hepburn to Sanger, 29 November 1929, Sanger to Hepburn, 30 November 1929, all in Sanger-LC Boxes 134 and 135; Gordon, Woman’s Body, p. 270; Katharine Beach Day, “Report for Conference, Connecticut Birth Control League,” 19 November 1929, and CBCL Annual Report, 16 January 1930, PPFA Boxes 36 and 1; Constance Heck to Hepburn, 2 April 1930, Clara Louise [Rowe] McGraw to Day, 2 July 1930, “List of Connecticut Endorsers,” 14 February 1930, and Harden Stille to Nancy Rockefeller, 28 July 1930, Sanger-LC Boxes 135 and 134.

51. On Connecticut politics of the period, including Cross’s victory and its perceived meaning, see Dahill, “J. Henry Roraback,” esp. pp. 2, 19, 55, 229–232, and Mitchell, “Social Legislation,” pp. 329–340. Significant contemporaneous stories include Allen B. MacMurphy, “Revolt in Connecticut,” Nation, 10 September 1930, pp. 263–265, and Bulkley S. Griffin, “Roraback of Connecticut,” New Republic, 26 November 1930, pp. 41–43. Also see George E. Clapp, “The Kaiser of Connecticut,” American Mercury, June 1933, pp. 229–236; Roth, Connecticut, pp. 196–198; Janick, A Diverse People, pp. 43–53; Mary H. Murray, “Wilbur L. Cross: Connecticut Statesman and Humanitarian, 1930–1935” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut, 1972), esp. pp. 50–51; Ernest H. Nelson, Jr., “Years of Transformation: Connecticut in the Time of Wilbur Cross, 1930–1938” (unpublished B.A. thesis, Princeton University, 1961); and Peter J. Lombardo, “Connecticut in the Great Depression, 1929–1933” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Notre Dame, 1979). Roraback remained a dominant figure in Connecticut politics until 1936, when he suffered brain damage as a result of an extremely serious fever. Sixteen months later, on 18 May 1937, he committed suicide by shooting himself. See Dahill, “J. Henry Roraback,” pp. 270–273, and Time, 31 May 1937, p. 20.

52. “Connecticut Birth Control League,” Birth Control Review 14 (November 1930): 324; Annie Porritt, “Connecticut,” Birth Control Review 15 (February 1931): 44; Kenyon, “Nullification or Repeal?,” Birth Control Review 14 (October 1930): 278–280; “A Symposium on Nullification and Repeal,” Birth Control Review 14 (November 1930): 309–316. Interestingly, and perhaps in reference to the summer 1930 contact with the Greenwich women, the Connecticut item also said that “As the law is so difficult to change, an effort is being made to get doctors to open clinics and so test it out.”

53. Youngs Rubber Corp. v. C. I. Lee & Co., 45 F.2d 103 (15 December 1930); “Some Legislative Aspects of Birth Control,” Harvard Law Review 45 (February 1932): 723–729 at 727; U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, Birth Control—Hearings Before a Subcommittee on S.4582, 71st Cong., 3rd sess., 13 and 14 February 1931, pp. 2, 28, 30, 50. On Youngs Rubber, also see Ernst, “How We Nullify,” The Nation 134 (27 January 1932): 113–114; Ernst and Lindey, The Censor Marches On (New York: Doubleday, Doran & Co., 1940), pp. 157–160; Ernst and Pickett, Birth Control in the Courts, pp. 18–20; Kennedy, Birth Control in America, pp. 246–248; James S. Murphy, The Condom Industry in the United States (Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Co., 1990), pp. 10–11; and Joshua Gamson, “Rubber Wars: Struggles over the Condom in the United States,” Journal of the History of Sexuality 1 (October 1990): 262–282. On the Senate hearing, also see Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 328–330; Kennedy, Birth Control in America, pp. 228–229; Lader, Margaret Sanger, pp. 268–270; Gray, Margaret Sanger, pp. 310–311; Morehouse, “The Speaking of Margaret Sanger,” pp. 192–195; and Robert E. Riegel and Lawrence Eager, “The Birth Control Controversy,” Current History 36 (August 1932): 563–568. See as well Sanger’s My Fight, pp. 346–356, and Autobiography, pp. 419–422.

54. See “Birth Control League of Massachusetts,” Birth Control Review 14 (October 1930): 292; Robert Homans et al., “Legal Opinions Concerning the Right of Doctors to Give Contraceptive Advice,” New England Journal of Medicine 202 (23 January 1930): 192–197; “The Proposed Amendment …” New England Journal of Medicine 203 (11 December 1930): 1218–1219; Norman E. Himes, “Does a Minority Rule Massachusetts?” Birth Control Review 15 (April 1931): 108–110; John Rock, The Time Has Come (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1963), pp. 75–77; Gieg, “The Birth Control League of Massachusetts,” pp. 74–78; and Antoinette F. Konikow, “The Doctor’s Dilemma in Massachusetts,” Birth Control Review 15 (January 1931): 21–22. Konikow advocated simply opening a facility, arguing “It is likely such a clinic would not be disturbed for years, if at all.” Even if raided, she added, “birth control has nothing to fear from a test case and the public’s reaction to it.”

55. Porritt, “Connecticut,” Birth Control Review, February 1931, p. 44; Hartford Courant, 23 January 1931, p. 17, 30 January 1931, p. 5, 24 February 1931, p. 17, 25 February 1931, p. 2, 21 March 1931, 1 April 1931, pp. 1, 5, 2 April 1931, pp. 1, 18, 3 April 1931, p. 3; New Haven Journal-Courier, 24 February 1931, p. 10, 3 April 1931, p. 1; Hartford Times, 24 February 1931, p. 1, 1 April 1931, pp. 1, 12, 2 April 1931, pp. 1, 25; Journal of the House, pp. 151, 276, 526, 919, 998–1004 (22 January, 29 January, 25 February, 26 March, 1 April); Journal of the Senate, pp. 147, 313, 521, 975 (27 January, 30 January, 27 February, 2 April); Porritt to “Dear Friend and Member,” 14 February 1931, Day Papers; Outlook and Independent, 15 April 1931, p. 518. On Katharine Beach Day, also see Day to Sanger, 17 December 1933, Sanger to Day, 14 February 1934, Day to Ms. Dryden, 4 February 1935, Sanger to Day, 8 February 1935, Day to Bernice Wickham, 15 January 1936, Wickham to Day, 17 January 1936, Day to Sanger, 28 December 1936, and Sanger to Day, 11 January 1937, all in Sanger-LC Box 135. Miller’s obituary appears in the Courant, 27 October 1971. Initially, two very similar bills, H.B. 156 by Epaphroditus Peck, and H.B. 632 by Marjory Cheney, were both introduced, as the version initially circulated for doctors’ approval (#632) was later slightly revised. H.B. 156 became the formal vehicle for the Judiciary Committee’s substitute. On the 1931 legislative session in general, see Van Dusen, Connecticut, pp. 294–296; and Wilbur L. Cross, Connecticut Yankee: An Autobiography (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1943), pp. 250–257.

56. C.-E. A. Winslow to David R. Lyman, 5 May 1931, Winslow Box 96; Charles W. Comfort, Jr., ed., Proceedings of the Connecticut State Medical Society 1931 (Hartford: CSMS, 1932), pp. 76–80; C.-E. A. Winslow to Elizabeth Reed, 26 May 1931, and Winslow to Clarence Hall, 26 May 1931, Winslow Box 96; “Progress in Connecticut,” Birth Control Review 15 (July 1931): 219–220; and especially A Study in Irony: Birth Control in Connecticut (New Haven: CBCL, February, 1932), 8pp. Winslow’s obituary appears in the New Haven Register, 9 January 1957. Creadick had been born in Delaware in 1883, had graduated from the University of Pennsylvania (1904) and the University of Pennsylvania Medical School (1908) and had practiced in New Haven since 1917. See Connecticut State Medical Journal 15 (May 1951): 414, Orvan W. Hess, M.D., to Garrow, 24 August 1992, and an undated New Haven newspaper obituary clipping reporting Creadick’s 23 July 1956 death in North Carolina, kindly supplied by Dr. Hess. One later document, where Creadick decries “the dysgenic effect created by the knowledge of contraception which is at present disseminated amongst the ranks of our people who ought to be having many children, while the dependent groups are proliferating,” clearly indicates Creadick’s eugenicist perspective. Creadick, “Report of the Medical Advisory Board,” CBCL, 26 June 1940, PPLC 10-K.

57. George Packard, “Is Birth Control Legal?” Birth Control Review 15 (September 1931): 248–250, 271; Christine E. Nicoll and Robert G. Weisbord, “The Early Years of the Rhode Island Birth Control League,” Rhode Island History 45 (November 1986): 111–25; Sanger, My Fight, p. 356; “Connecticut,” Birth Control Review 15 (November 1931): 328. Also see p. 320, plus “A Conference of the New England States on Birth Control,” Providence, 14 October 1931, PPFA Box 1; as well as New London Day, 12 April 1977, p. 12, and Laurel J. Fein, “Waving No Flags: The History of the Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut, 1923–1965” (unpublished Senior History Essay, Yale University, 16 April 1982), pp. 9–10.

58. Creadick to Sanger, 22 February 1932, Sanger-LC Box 134; New York Times, 7 March 1932, p. 5, 8 March 1932, p. 3; New Haven Times, 7 and 9 March 1932; New Haven Register, 9 March 1932; New Haven Journal-Courier, 9 March 1932; Stamford Advocate, 10 March 1932; Sanger to Creadick, 15 March 1932, Sanger to Hepburn, 16 March 1932, and Sanger to Creadick, 25 March 1932, Sanger-LC Boxes 134 and 135. Katharine Hepburn was at best ambivalent about Sanger’s and the CBCL’s contacts with Whitney and the Eugenics Society. As she told Sanger, “To my mind the eugenics men are stupid.… They’re a dumb crowd and a waste of time. Birth Control is more popular than eugenics.” Hepburn to Sanger, 8 May 1931, Sanger-LC Box 135. Also early in 1932 the Hartford Federation of Churches endorsed birth control legalization. Hartford Courant, 24 February 1932, p. 1; Hartford Times, 24 February 1932.

59. U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, Birth Control—Hearings Before a Subcommittee, 72nd Cong., 1st sess., 12, 19 and 20 May 1932 (concerning S. 4436); U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on Ways and Means, Birth Control—Hearings on H.R. 11082, 72nd Cong., 1st sess., 19 and 20 May 1932, pp. 7, 35; U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Amend the Tariff Act of 1930 and the Criminal Code, Report No. 1435, 72nd Cong., 1st sess., 26 May 1932, p. 2; New York Times, 13 May 1932, p. 40, 20 May 1932, p. 3, 25 May 1932, p. 11. Also see Hepburn to Sanger, 9 January 1932, and Sanger to Hepburn, 12 January 1932, Sanger-LC Box 135; U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, Birth Control—Hearings Before a Subcommittee, 72nd Cong., 1st sess., 24 and 30 June 1932 (concerning S. 4436); Robert S. Allen, “Congress and Birth Control,” The Nation 134 (27 January 1932): 104–105; Louise S. Bryant, “The Legal Status of Contraception,” Birth Control Review 16 (November 1932): 263–266; and Sanger’s Autobiography, pp. 422–424. See as well Francis L. Broderick, Right Reverend New Dealer: John A. Ryan (New York: Macmillan, 1963), pp. 148–150; and David J. O’Brien, American Catholics and Social Reform: The New Deal Years (New York: Oxford University Press, 1968), pp. 120–149.

60. Creadick, “Report of President,” March 1932, and Creadick to Winslow, 27 April 1932, Winslow Box 96; Charles W. Comfort, ed., Proceedings of the Connecticut State Medical Society 1932 (Hartford: CSMS, 1933), pp. 58–63; New Haven Journal-Courier, 27 May 1932, pp. 1, 6.

61. Report of the Greenwich Committee for Maternal Health, September 1932 to August 1933, 15pp., Winslow Box 96 and Rockefeller Papers; Harden Stille to Rockefeller, 28 July 1930, Sanger-LC Box 134; Rockefeller in GCMH Annual Report, 1 April 1936–31 March 1937, PPLM Box 118; Nancy Rockefeller, Autobiographical Statement, 1 January 1955, PPLC 24-R; Rockefeller Interviews with Esther Smith (pp. 9–11, 39–42) and with Carole Nichols (pp. 12–24); Florence Rose to Rockefeller, 4 August 1932, Sanger-LC Box 134; Cheri Appel Interview with Ellen Chesler, and Appel letter in New York Times, 13 February 1990, p. A24. On Florence Darrach, in addition to a Garrow conversation with her daughter-in-law, Mrs. William Darrach IV, see an undated autobiographical resume in PPLC 24-A and her obituary in the Greenwich Time, 29 September 1964, p. 2; on William Darrach, see the New York Herald Tribune, 6 January 1931, and obituaries in the New York Times, 25 May 1948, p. 27, New York Journal-American, 24 May 1948, and New York Herald Tribune, 25 May 1948, plus a 26 May Herald editorial on him. On the Massachusetts clinic, see Birth Control and the Massachusetts Law (Boston: PPLM, 1959), and PPLM Reports 24 (Spring 1974): 1–4.

62. James W. Cooper, “Change the Connecticut Law,” Birth Control Review 16 (November 1932): 281–282; Hartford Courant, 21 August 1932; Marjory Nield Blackall, “The Story of Annie Porritt” (unpublished manuscript, 1976), pp. 11–14, Porritt Papers; Garrow conversations with Katharine H. Hepburn and Robert H. Hepburn; Henry F. Fletcher to Longshaw K. Porritt, 24 August 1932, and A. Nowell Creadick and Elizabeth Reed to the ABCL, 5 October 1932, Porritt Box 1; Alison Hastings Porritt to Katherine Seymour Day, 16 January 1933, Day Papers; A H. Palache to Creadick, 20 January 1933, and Creadick to Sanger, 21 January 1933, Sanger-LC Box 134; Mitchell, “Social Legislation,” p. 341; Hartford Courant, 26 January 1933, p. 3. Also see Sanger to Katherine Seymour Day, 2 February 1933, Day Papers; and Hartford Courant, 19 February 1933. On Raymond E. Baldwin, see Baldwin’s own Let’s Go Into Politics (New York: Macmillan, 1952), esp. pp. 53–54; and Baldwin’s obituaries in the New York Times, 5 October 1986, p. 44, and the Hartford Courant, 5 October 1986, pp. A1, A14. Curtiss S. Johnson, Raymond E. Baldwin: Connecticut Statesman (Chester, CT: Pequot Press, 1972), has remarkably little to say about Baldwin’s years in the legislature.

63. Journal of the House, p. 247 (25 January); Journal of the Senate, p. 290 (26 January); House Bill 519, 1933 Connecticut General Assembly Records (RG 2), Box 136; Hartford Courant, 2 March 1933, pp. 1, 7; Hartford Times, 2 March 1933, p. 9; New Haven Journal-Courier, 2 March 1933, pp. 1, 5.

64. New Haven Register, 28 April 1933; Hartford Courant, 2 May 1933, pp. 1, 5, 3 May 1933, pp. 1, 4, 4 May 1933, p. 10, 5 May 1933, p. 8; Journal of the House, pp. 1489–1495 (2 May); Hartford Times, 2 May 1933, pp. 1, 11, 4 May 1933, p. 1; New Haven Journal-Courier, 3 May 1933, pp. 1, 9, 5 May 1933, pp. 1, 3, 6 May 1933; New York Herald Tribune, 3 May 1933; Journal of the Senate, p. 1586 (4 May); Waterbury Republican, 5 May 1933; Bridgeport Herald, 7 May 1933; untitled one page CBCL memo, 4 May 1933, PPLC Papers.

65. Journal of the House, pp. 1607, 1714, 1775–1782 (9 May, 18 May, 23 May); Journal of the Senate, pp. 1636, 1791–1792, 2054 (10 May, 24 May, 6 June); Hartford Courant, 10 May 1933, 11 May 1933, p. 3, 19 May 1933, 24 May 1933, pp. 1, 4, 25 May 1933, p. 5, 7 June 1933, pp. 1, 6; Hartford Times, 10 May 1933, 23 May 1933, p. 1; 1933 Connecticut General Assembly Records (RG 2), Box 136; New Haven Journal-Courier, 24 May 1933, pp. 1, 9; New York Herald Tribune, 24 May 1933; Sanger to Creadick, and to Hepburn, 26 May 1933, and Hepburn to Sanger, 27 May 1933, Sanger-LC Boxes 134 and 135; Springfield Union, 28 May 1933; New Haven Register, 7 June 1933. Two years later Creadick commented to Sanger (10 May 1935, Sanger-LC Box 135) that “Of course, in my opinion, the amendment was wrong in principle but it would have permitted clinics.” On the 1933 legislative session in general, see Cross, Connecticut Yankee, pp. 277–290; Van Dusen, Connecticut, pp. 299–300; and Murray, “Wilbur L. Cross,” p. 279. Idiosyncratic at best is Albert Levitt, “Who Owns Connecticut?,” The Nation 138 (2 May 1934): 505–507.

66. Connecticut Birth Control League program flyer, 23 November 1933, Winslow Box 96; Report of the Greenwich Committee for Maternal Health, September 1932 to August 1933, Winslow Box 96, and Rockefeller Papers; Report of the Greenwich Committee for Maternal Health, August 1933 to September 1934, Rockefeller Papers and PPLM Box 118; Greenwich Press, 21 November 1933, pp. 1, 7, 23 November 1933, 3 May 1934; Waterbury Republican, 23 November 1933; New York Times, 24 November 1933; Bridgeport Herald, 26 November 1933.

67. Sanger to Hepburn, 11 December 1933, Sanger-LC; U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Birth Control—Hearings on H.R. 5978, 73rd Cong., 2nd sess., 18 and 19 January 1934; “Remarks of Mrs. Thomas N. Hepburn,” 17 January 1934, 2pp., Sanger-LC Box 135; New York World-Telegram, 18 January 1934, pp. 1, 14; Hepburn to Sanger, 23 January 1934, Sanger to Hepburn, 26 January 1934, and Creadick to Sanger, 29 January 1934, Sanger-LC Box 135; Hannah M. Stone, “The Federal Hearing,” Birth Control Review, March 1934, pp. 2–4; Sanger to Nancy Rockefeller, 27 February 1934, Rockefeller Papers; U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, Birth Control—Hearings Before a Subcommittee on S. 1842, 73rd Cong., 2nd sess., 1, 20 and 27 March 1934; Kennedy, Birth Control in America, pp. 239–240; Guy I. Burch, “Catholics on Birth Control,” New Republic, 5 September 1934, pp. 98–100; Elizabeth H. Garrett, “Birth Control’s Business Baby,” New Republic, 17 January 1934, pp. 269–272; Sanger, “Birth Control,” State Government 7 (September 1934): 187–190, at 190 (which no doubt was directly influenced by a 1 February 1933 Ernst to Sanger letter that appears at page four of the 1934 Senate hearings cited above); Grant Sanger Interview with Ellen Chesler, p. 26; U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads, Offenses Against the Postal Service—Hearings Before Subcommittee No. 8, 74th Cong., 1st sess., 8 March and 4 and 10 April 1935. Also see Florence Darrach to Sanger, 30 April 1934, and Sanger to Darrach, 4 May 1934, Sanger-LC Box 135; Alison Hastings Porritt to Sanger, 20 June 1934, Clara Louise McGraw to Sanger, 22 June 1934, and Adelaide Pearson to Katharine Beach Day, 28 June 1934, Sanger-LC Box 135; Anthony M. Turano, “Birth Control and the Law,” American Mercury 34 (April 1935): 466–472; Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 342–348, 352–354; and Sanger’s Autobiography, pp. 424–427. The follow-on case to Youngs was Davis v. U.S., 62 F.2d 473 (6th Cir., 10 January 1933), reversing a wholesaler’s conviction for distributing condoms to druggists and doctors. Four years after Garrett’s significant New Republic piece, an even more detailed and devastating portrait of the commercial contraceptive industry appeared: “The Accident of Birth,” Fortune 17 (February 1938): 83–86, 108–114. Boldly terming industry profits “extortionate,” the article added that “The industry harbors hundreds of scoundrels who make small fortunes out of ignorance.” Also see John W. Riley and Matilda White, “The Use of Various Methods of Contraception,” American Sociological Review 5 (December 1940): 890–903, and Grace Naismith, “The Racket in Contraceptives,” American Mercury 70 (July 1950): 3–13.

68. Hartford Courant, 24 October 1934; Sarah Clement Pease, “Report from Connecticut Birth Control League, 1935,” PPFA Box 4; Creadick to Sanger, 29 October 1934, and Hepburn to Sanger, 4 December 1934, Sanger-LC Box 135; Elsa S. Van Zelm, “Minutes,” CBCL Board of Directors, 14 November 1934, PPLC 10-B; Hartford Times, 29 January 1935, p. 9, 24 March 1935; Journal of the House, pp. 320, 547 and 589–590 (31 January, 19 February, 26 February); Hartford Courant, 1 February 1935, p. 16, 21 February 1935, p. 10; 27 February 1935, p. 7; Journal of the Senate, pp. 391, 516–517 (1 February and 20 February); Catholic Transcript, 7 March 1935 and 14 March 1935; New York News, 15 March 1935.

69. Hartford Times, 5 April 1935, pp. 1, 50, 6 April 1935, 10 April 1935; Hartford Courant, 6 April 1935, pp. 1, 18, 5 June 1935; Stamford Advocate, 6 April 1935, pp. 1, 8, 21 May 1935; New Haven Journal-Courier, 6 April 1935, pp. 1, 5; Bridgeport Herald, 7 April 1935; “Brief prepared by Mr. James Wayne Cooper … for the Legislative Hearing” [5 April 1935], PPLC 1-H; Sarah Pease to “Dear League Member,” 8 April 1935, and “H.C.S.” [Hilda Crosby Standish], Letter to Editor, 12 April 1935, PPLC; Elsa Van Zelm to Stella Hanau, 17 April 1935, Sanger-LC Box 134; Van Zelm, “Minutes,” CBCL Board of Directors, 8 May 1935 and 4 June 1935, PPLC 10-C; Creadick to Sanger, 10 May 1935 (and attaching Senator John F. Lynch to “Mrs. K,” 10 April 1935), and Sanger to Creadick, 19 June 1935, Sanger-LC Box 135. Also see Sanger to Hepburn, 2 April 1935 and 9 April 1935, Sanger-LC Box 84. Cooper was a graduate of Yale College (1926) and Yale Law School (1929); his obituary appears in the New Haven Register, 18 January 1989, p. B7. On the 1935 legislative session in general, see Van Dusen, Connecticut, pp. 302–303; and Cross, Connecticut Yankee, pp. 313–327.

70. Elsa Van Zelm, “Minutes,” CBCL Board of Directors, 4 June 1935, PPLC 10-C; Hartford Courant, 5 June 1935; Hartford Times, 5 June 1935; Sarah Clement Pease, “President’s Report,” 2 June 1938, PPLC 10-F; Sallie Pease, Round Table Remarks, 19 February 1936, Boston, p. 7, PPLM Box 81; Pease’s 17 June 1936 “President’s Report,” which also appears in the Birth Control Review, October 1936, pp. 4–5; Pease to Clarence J. Gamble, 5 June 1935, Gamble Papers 6–111; Mabel H. Robbins, “Minutes,” 26 June 1935, PPLC 39-C. On Lillian Joseloff, who had been born in Ontario in 1894 and was the first female graduate of Columbia University’s College of Pharmacy, see her Hartford Courant obituary, 15 February 1975, and that of her husband Morris, 20 May 1969, p. 8. On Eleanor Calverly, who died in 1968, see an undated “Autobiographical Sketch” (c.1955) in Calverly Box 137, and her husband Edwin’s Courant obituary, 23 April 1971. Eleanor Calverly earned her medical degree at the Woman’s Medical College of Pennsylvania in 1908 and then with her husband spent two years in Saudi Arabia and eighteen years in what is now Kuwait before moving to Hartford in 1930. She later published a memoir of her years in the Middle East, My Arabian Days and Nights (New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1958), but it makes no reference to her later birth control involvement. Hilda Crosby Standish often appears as simply Hilda Crosby in the initial 1935 CBCL documents, but her full married name is used here throughout. Background on Dr. Standish comes from her interviews with Carole Nichols, with Garrow, and with Andrea Hubbell, as well as from the Courant, 7 July 1970, p. 1; West Hartford News, 20 September 1979, and Standish to Jean Stabell, 14 August 1975, PPLC 33-A. Standish graduated from Wellesley in 1924, from Cornell Medical College in 1928, and, after an internship and residency in Philadelphia and St. Louis, spent some eighteen months working in Shanghai, China, before returning to Hartford in 1934. See also the Courant, 13 June 1928 and 7 September 1932. Also generally see Mary R. Walsh, “Doctors Wanted: No Women Need Apply”—Sexual Barriers in the Medical Profession, 1835–1975 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977); Regina M. Morantz et al., eds., In Her Own Words (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1982), pp. 3–44; and Regina M. Morantz-Sanchez, Sympathy and Silence: Women Physicians in American Medicine (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985).

71. Mabel H. Robbins, “Minutes,” 26 June 1935, PPLC 39-C; Pease, Round Table Remarks, 19 February 1936, Boston, p. 7, PPLM Box 81; Pease, “Annual Report of the Connecticut Birth Control League,” 22–23 January 1936, PPLC 10-D; Robbins, “Minutes,” Board of Sponsors, 25 September 1935, PPLC 39-C; Robbins, “Minutes,” CBCL Board of Directors, 9 October 1935, PPLC 10-C.

72. Hartford Courant, 24 October 1935, 25 October 1935, p. 1; Hartford Times, 24 October 1935, pp. 1, 3, 25 October 1935, p. 10; New Haven Journal-Courier, 26 October 1935; Pease to Clarence Gamble, 24 October 1935, Gamble 6–111; Henrietta Scott, “Minutes,” 29 October 1935, PPLC 39-C. Also see Hepburn to Sanger, 14 October 1935, Sanger-LC Box 84. On Lucius F. Robinson, Jr., who graduated from Yale in 1918 and from Harvard Law School in 1921, see his Hartford Courant obituary, 6 February 1987, pp. D1, D8. On Nicholas F. Rago, a 1915 Yale College and a 1917 Yale Law School graduate who served as city prosecuting attorney from 1935 until 1937, see his Courant obituary, 6 May 1969.

73. Joy Sweet, “Minutes,” CBCL Board, 13 November 1935, PPLC 10-C; Nancy Rockefeller to Mrs. A. F. Howland, 19 January 1936, PPLM Box 15; Luke B. Lockwood to Florence Darrach, 21 October 1935, PPLC 1-I; Report of the Greenwich Committee for Maternal Health, September 1934 to March 1936, 12pp., Rockefeller Papers. Perhaps surprisingly, Section 6244 never became an issue in any of Connecticut’s subsequent birth control litigation.

74. Hartford Courant, 11 December 1935, 13 December 1935, 14 January 1936, 20 January 1936, 21 January 1936, 23 January 1936; New York Herald Tribune, 8 January 1936; Hartford Times, 13 January 1936, p. 1, 15 January 1936, 20 January 1936, p. 1, 21 January 1936, p. 8, 24 January 1936; Henrietta Scott, “Minutes,” Hartford MHC Board, 14 January 1936, PPLC 39-C; Joy Sweet, “Minutes,” CBCL Board, 15 January 1936, PPLC 10-D; Pease, “Annual Report of the Connecticut Birth Control League,” 22–23 January 1936, PPLC 10-D; Pease, Round Table Remarks, Boston, 19 February 1936, p. 8, PPLM Box 81. The New York decision, by U.S. District Judge Grover M. Moscowitz, was U.S. v. One Package, 13 F. Supp. 334 (S.D.N.Y., 6 January 1936). Also see the Journal of Contraception, November 1935, pp. 11–12, December 1935, pp. 23–24, and January 1936, p. 39. On Andrew Kelly, see Duggan, The Catholic Church in Connecticut, pp. 250–251, obituaries in the Hartford Courant, 8 June 1948, the Hartford Times, 8 June 1948, the New York Herald Tribune, 9 June 1948, and a much later posthumous profile by Rev. John S. Kennedy in the Catholic Transcript, 13 January 1978, all of which also are in Kelly’s file in the Archives of the Hartford Archdiocese.

75. Joy Sweet, “Minutes,” CBCL Board, 11 March 1936, PPLC 10-D; Elisabeth L. Whittemore to Mary White, 28 April 1936, PPLM Box 118; Sweet, “Minutes,” CBCL Board, 13 May 1936, PPLC 10-D; Florence Rose to Hepburn, 29 May 1936, and Adelaide Pearson to Hepburn, 23 November 1936, Sanger-LC Box 135; Henrietta Scott, “Minutes,” Hartford MHC, 8 June 1936, PPLC 10-D; Hartford Courant, 9 June 1936, p. 24; Ruth Deeds, “Secretary’s Report,” and Mabel H. Robbins, “Minutes,” CBCL Annual Meeting, 17 June 1936, PPLC 10-D; A Red Letter Year for the Connecticut Birth Control League, 4pp. pamphlet, July 1936; Robinson to Greenbaum, Wolff & Ernst, 2 September 1936, PPFA Box 99; “News from the States,” Birth Control Review, October 1936, pp. 4–5; Lillian Joseloff, “Minutes,” CBCL Clinical Committee, 29 October 1936, PPLC 10-D; Standish to Clarence Gamble, 11 November 1936, Gamble 6–112; Frances Goodell, “Minutes,” CBCL Board, 7 December 1936, PPLC 10-D. Describing a 21 February 1936 Hepburn talk in Bridgeport, the March 1 Bridgeport Herald commented that she had “gestures and mannerisms which reminded one of her daughter.” Also see Morris Ernst to Mary Ware Dennett, 19 February 1936, Dennett 18–329, characterizing Hepburn as “quite some gal.”

76. U.S. v. One Package, 86 F.2d 737; New York Times, 8 December 1936, p. 9; New York Herald Tribune, 8 December 1936; New York Post, 8 December 1936; Sanger to Hepburn, 2 December 1936, and untitled minutes of 9 and 10 December 1936 meetings, PPFA Box 33; Hannah M. Stone, “Birth Control Wins,” The Nation 144 (16 January 1937): 70–71; Ernst and Harriet F. Pilpel, “A Medical Bill of Rights,” Journal of Contraception, February 1937, pp. 35–37; National Committee, A New Day Dawns for Birth Control, 47pp., July 1937, pp. 5, 8, 39–41; Ernst, “The Law Catches Up With Science,” in Birth Control: A Symposium [11 October 1937] (New York: New York Academy of Medicine, 1938), pp. 12–24, at 16–17; Sanger, “The Status of Birth Control,” New Republic, 20 April 1938, pp. 324–326; Herbert E. Mayer, Columbia Law Review 37 (May 1937): 854–856, at 856; and Harry Kalven, Jr., “A Special Corner of Civil Liberties,” New York University Law Review 31 (November 1956): 1223–1237, at 1226. On One Package, also see Journal of Contraception, October 1936, p. 176, November 1936, p. 199, and December 1936, pp. 220–222; Time, 21 December 1936, p. 24; Birth Control Review, January 1937, pp. 3–5; Virginia Law Review, April 1937, pp. 709–710; Harvard Law Review, May 1937, p. 1312; Benjamin, “Lobbying for Birth Control,” pp. 48–49; Ernst and Lindey, The Censor Marches On, p. 161; Ernst and Pickett, Birth Control, pp. 30–34; Sanger’s Autobiography, p. 427–428; Lader, Margaret Sanger, pp. 301–303; Kennedy, Birth Control in America, p. 251, 255, 258, 269–270; Dienes, Law, Politics, and Birth Control, pp. 112–115; Reed, The Birth Control Movement, pp. 121, 264; Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 372–375; and the Ernst volume on the case, at the Schlesinger Library.

77. Hadley Cantril, Public Opinion, 1935–1946 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1951), pp. 41–42; Hazel G. Erskine, “The Polls: The Population Explosion, Birth Control, and Sex Education,” Public Opinion Quarterly 30 (Fall 1966): 490–501, at 491–492. Also see “The Fortune Quarterly Survey,” Fortune 14 (July 1936): 158; and Henry F. Pringle, “What Do the Women of America Think About Birth Control?,” Ladies’ Home Journal, March 1938, pp. 14–15, 94–97. Cantril’s state-by-state breakdown of the May 1936 responses indicates that Connecticut respondents were 78 percent yes, 22 percent no, while Massachusetts was the third lowest (59 yes, 41 no), trailed only by North and South Dakota.

78. James Reed, “Doctors, Birth Control, and Social Values: 1830–1970,” in Morris J. Vogel and Charles E. Rosenberg, eds., The Therapeutic Revolution (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1979), pp. 109–133; Kennedy, Birth Control in America, pp. 212–217; New York Times, 29 January 1937, p. 7, 9 June 1937, pp. 1, 26; National Committee, A New Day Dawns, p. 41; Journal of the American Medical Association 108 (3 April, 22 May, 26 June 1937): 1179–1180, 1819–1820, 2217–2218; Charles E. Scribner and Ernst, “Interpretation of the Federal Statutes Relating to Contraceptives,” 30 April 1937, 7pp., Ernst Box 266; Time, 12 July 1937, p. 47; Mabel T. Wood, “Birth Control’s Big Year,” Current History 46 (August 1937): 55–59; Ernst and Pickett, Birth Control in the Courts, p. 56; Andrew G. Truxal and Francis E. Merrill, The Family in American Culture (New York: Prentice-Hall, 1947), pp. 232–241; Sanger’s Autobiography, p. 430; and Patricia J. Norton, “Margaret Sanger and the Depression: Birth Control Comes of Age” (unpublished M.A. thesis, Smith College, 1955), p. 94.

79. Hartford Times, 5 January 1937, 9 March 1937, p. 6; Hartford Courant, 6 January 1937, p. 6, 6 February 1937, p. 9, 3 April 1937; Nancy Rockefeller to Mrs. Cromwell, 12 January 1937, PPFA Box 3; Ruth Deeds, “Minutes,” CBCL Board, 21 January 1937, PPLC 10-E; Waterbury Democrat, 27 January 1937; Sarah Pease, “Report of the Connecticut Birth Control League,” 27–28 January 1937, PPLC 10-E; Journal of the House, pp. 366 and 488 (5 February and 2 March); Waterbury Republican, 6 February 1937, 23 March 1937, p. 3; Lois Stringfield, “Minutes,” CBCL Clinical Committee, 15 February 1937, PPLC 10-E; Birth Control Review, February/March 1937, p. 4; Journal of Contraception, June/July 1937, p. 140; Hilda C. Standish, “Medical Report,” 15 June 1937, and Pease, “Clinic Report,” 15 June 1937, PPLC 39-C. On Representative Fitzgerald, also see Waterbury Democrat, 11 April 1936.

80. Tilson to Sanger, 5 March 1937, Rose Box 20; Hartford Times, 16 March 1937, p. 6; Hartford Courant, 16 March 1937, p. 14, 3 June 1937, p. 8. Also see Tilson to Rose, 8 April 1936, Rose to Tilson, 12 April 1936, Tilson to Rose, 1 May 1936, Rose to Tilson, 8 May 1936, Rose to Tilson, 17 March 1937, Tilson to Sanger, 9 January 1938, and Rose to Tilson, 19 January 1938, Rose Box 20.

81. The most detailed description of the June 3 raid appears in the ninety-page transcript of the 13 July trial, Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Carolyn T. Gardner, Flora Rand, and Lucille Lord-Heinstein, PPLM Box 85. Sears’s 20 July verdict remarks appear as subsequent pages 91 to 98 in that transcript. Also see Lord-Heinstein, “The Salem Raid and Trial,” Journal of Contraception, August/September 1937, pp. 156–157 and 167; Minutes, BCLM Executive Board, 4 June 1937, PPLM Box 26; Journal of Contraception, June/July 1937, p. 143; two Caroline Carter Davis articles in the Birth Control Review, “Progress in Massachusetts,” December 1936, p. 6, and “In the ‘Cradle of Liberty,’” October 1937, pp. 6–8; New York Times, 21 July 1937, p. 22; Loraine Campbell to Linda Hawkridge, 27 July 1937, PPLM Box 5; New England Journal of Medicine 217 (12 August 1937): 277–278. On Lord-Heinstein, also see Boston Globe, 2 May 1976, pp. 1, 12–13. On the Fitchburg concerns, see Walter A. Barrows to Massachusetts Public Health Commissioner Henry D. Chadwick, 21 April 1937, Chadwick to Barrows, 22 April 1937, Samuel M. Salny to Barrows, 23 April 1937, Barrows to Linda Hawkridge, 23 April 1937, Salny to Barrows, 28 April 1937, and Barrows to Hawkridge, 8 May 1937, PPLM Box 1.

82. See Ilia Galleani, “The Brookline Case,” Journal of Contraception, October 1937, pp. 178–179, Caroline Carter Davis, “In the ‘Cradle of Liberty,’” Birth Control Review, October 1937, pp. 6–8; New York Times, 4 August 1937, p. 11, 5 August 1937, p. 25, 7 August 1937, p. 5; Linda Hawkridge’s “Summary of Police Activities,” 5 August 1937, 2pp., and Minutes, BCLM Executive Committee, 4 August 1937, PPLM Box 26; Loraine Campbell’s Interview with James Reed, p. 22; “Summary of Conversation with Mr. Dodge by Mrs. Hawkridge,” 13 September 1937, PPLM Box 9. Also see Martha G. Waldstein, “A Maternal Health Center Reviews Its Patients,” Journal of Contraception 4 (November 1939): 203–209.

83. A seventy-nine-page Transcript of Proceedings in Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Ilia Galleani, Brookline Municipal Court, No. 1124, 15 September 1937, is in PPLM Box 85. Also see Galleani, “The Brookline Case,” Journal of Contraception, October 1937, pp. 178–179.

84. “The Massachusetts Hearings,” Birth Control Review, October 1937, pp. 4–5; Robert G. Dodge to Loraine Campbell, 27 September 1937, PPLM Box 5; Galleani to Campbell, 4 October 1937, PPLM Box 11; Dodge to Hawkridge, 16 October 1937, PPLM Box 9; “Statement Made by Mrs. Mary M. White Regarding the Legal Situation,” 20 October 1937, PPLM Box 85; “On the Massachusetts Front,” Birth Control Review, November 1937, p. 21; Ernst, “The Law Catches Up With Science,” in Birth Control: A Symposium [11 October 1937] (New York: New York Academy of Medicine, 1938), pp. 12–24, at 16–17.

85. George G. Smith, “The Massachusetts Physicians Protest the Clinic Raids,” Journal of Contraception, February 1938, pp. 36–37; Birth Control Review, December 1937–January 1938, pp. 40–41; Walter A. Barrows to Linda Hawkridge, 8 December 1937, PPLM Box 1; Hepburn to Hawkridge, 27 December 1937, PPLM Box 11.

86. Sarah C. Pease, “1937 Report,” 26–27 January 1938, Mabel H. Robbins, “Minutes,” CBCL Board, 10 January 1938, and Dorothea H. Scoville to Pease, 28 May 1938, PPLC 10-E; Stamford Advocate, 5 April 1938; Hartford Times, 28 April 1938; Barbara Molstad, “Report of the New Haven Clinic,” 2 June 1938, PPLC 10-F; Pease’s “President’s Report” for the Hartford clinic, 14 June 1938, PPLC 39-D; Journal of Contraception, December 1938, p. 236; Clarence J. Gamble to Pease, 7 June 1937 and 2 October 1937, Pease to Gamble, “Monday” [8 November 1937] and 19 November 1937, Gamble to Pease, 23 November 1937, Pease to Gamble, 26 November 1937, all in Gamble 6–114. On Leah Cadbury, later Leah Cadbury Furtmuller, see her 24 May 1990 obituary in the Main Line Times, a 9 November 1937 response to a Bryn Mawr Alumnae Survey, and her extensive 1981–1982 oral history interviews with Carolyn Rittenhouse, which unfortunately do not mention either Gamble or her work in Connecticut. On Gamble, see Reed, The Birth Control Movement; also see Doone and Greer Williams, Every Child a Wanted Child: Clarence James Gamble, M.D. and His Work in the Birth Control Movement (Boston: Francis A. Countway Library of Medicine, 1978), an unscholarly and family-sponsored biography that is nonetheless informative.

87. Cadbury to Hart, 28 January 1938, PPLC 45-A; Cadbury to Root, 2 February 1938, Cadbury to Mrs. Hetzel, 13 February 1938, Cadbury to Florence Chase, 28 January 1938, Cadbury to Mabel Robbins, 6 February 1938, Cadbury to Rev. John Lewis, 6 February 1938, Cadbury to Dr. Henry Mason, 6 February 1938, and “Coming to Meeting, Monday, February 7,” all PPLC 48-A; Cadbury, “Report on First Meeting at Waterbury,” 7 February 1938, PPLC 48-B. Edith Chase died on 6 June 1972, and her obituary appears in that day’s Waterbury American.

88. Cadbury to Chase, 9 February 1938, Chase to Cadbury, 12 February 1938, Cadbury to Ruth Northrop, 13 February 1938, Cadbury to Florence Chase, 13 February 1938, Cadbury to Mildred Ely, 13 February 1938, Cadbury to Mrs. Hetzel, 13 February 1938 (II), Cadbury mimeo letter, 15 February 1938, PPLC 48-A; Cadbury, “Report on Waterbury and Willimantic,” 16 February 1938, PPLC 48-B; Ely to Cadbury, 16 February 1938, Hart to Cadbury, 21 February 1938, Cadbury to Millicent Pond, 21 February 1938, Cadbury to Mrs. Heminway, 21 February 1938, PPLC 48-A.

89. Cadbury, “Final Report of Work in Willimantic and Waterbury,” 14 March 1938, PPLC 48-B. One of the two doctors, John M. Freiheit, later explained that birth control “can only be used well by intelligent people” and that widespread attempts at use by the poor would only result in more abortions: “I am certain that if you legalize birth control you will sooner or later have to legalize abortions.” Instead, “we really should be lecturing the intelligentsia to cut down on contraception and try to catch up with the masses,” and if birth control’s popularity spread further, “the doctor himself will soon lose control of the matter.” Freiheit to Nowell Creadick, 27 August 1940, PPLC 2-M.

90. Cadbury, “Final Report of Work in Willimantic and Waterbury,” 14 March 1938, PPLC 48-B. On Clara McTernan, who died 9 April 1982 in Peekskill, New York, the same town where she had been born on 17 March 1899, I have relied principally on a long and valuable conversation with her step-son, John W. McTernan. Charles McTernan died on 26 May 1967, and his obituary appears in the 27 May Waterbury Republican.

91. Cadbury to McTernan, 18 March 1938, Gamble 6–115. Also see Millicent Pond to McTernan, 30 March 1938, Gamble 6–115; and Robbins, “Minutes,” CBCL Board, 11 April 1938, p. 2, PPLC 10-E.

92. Bridgeport Post, 17 April 1938, 18 April 1938, 19 April 1938; Bridgeport Telegram, 18 April 1938, 20 April 1938; Bridgeport Times-Star, 18 April 1938; Journal of Contraception, May 1938, p. 116.

93. Robert G. Dodge and Walter A. Barrows, “Brief for the Defendants,” Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Carolyn T. Gardner et al., Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, #8689, February 1938, esp. pp. 23–25; Murray F. Hall and Donald J. Hurley, “Brief of Amici Curiae,” Commonwealth v. Gardner; Hugh A. Cregg and John J. Ryan, Jr., “Brief for the Commonwealth,” Commonwealth v. Gardner, esp. pp. 4–5; and Linda Hawkridge’s notes on the oral argument, plus a 2pp. 15 February summary of them, all in PPLM Box 85; Birth Control Review, March 1938, pp. 59–60; Journal of Contraception, April 1938, pp. 95–96; Hawkridge, “Record of Conversation with Mr. Dodge,” 17 February 1938, Dodge to Hawkridge, 9 April 1938, and “Digest of Mr. Robert G. Dodge’s Remarks at the Annual Dinner,” 12 April 1938, all in PPLM Box 9; Hepburn to Caroline Carter Davis, 25 April 1938, PPLM Box 11.

94. Commonwealth v. Gardner, 300 Mass 372, 15 N.E.2d 222, 224; Birth Control Review, June 1938, p. 104; Hawkridge, “Memo of Conversation with Mr. Dodge and Mr. Barrows,” 27 May 1938, Dodge to Hawkridge, 28 May 1938, PPLM Box 9; Hawkridge to Allison Pierce Moore, 15 June 1938, Marguerite Benson to Hawkridge, 16 June 1938, Sanger to Richard N. Pierson, 24 June 1938, PPFA Box 40; Frankfurter to Hawkridge [excerpt], 24 June 1938, PPLM Box 83; Pilpel to Eric Matsner, 28 June 1938, Charles E. Scribner to Pierson, 29 June 1938, PPFA Box 40; “Conference Arranged By American Birth Control League,” 29 June 1938, and [Hawkridge], “Minutes of Meeting on the Massachusetts Case,” 30 June 1938, PPLM Box 85; Hawkridge, “Report of Conference on Appeal to Supreme Court,” 29 June 1938, PPLM Box 26; Dodge to Hazel Moore, 9 July 1938, PPLM Box 9; Edward O. Proctor to Charles E. Cropsey, 26 July 1938, and Cropsey to Proctor, 27 July 1938, Gardner Case File (#42,749), National Archives, RG 267, Box 1421; Pearson to Doris L. Rutledge, 28 July 1938, PPLM Box 84; Birth Control Review, October 1938, p. 119; Mary M. White, “Minutes,” BCLM Board, 4 October 1938, PPLM Box 26 Also see Kennedy, Birth Control in America, pp. 252-253; and Dienes, Law, Politics, and Birth Control, pp. 117–121. The Jersey City case, which Ernst a year later won in the U.S. Supreme Court, was Hague v. Congress of Industrial Organizations, 307 U.S. 496 (1939); per the 4 October BCLM minutes, Frankfurter on that date again reiterated to Hawkridge his advice against switching lawyers. Formally speaking there were four distinct appeals, one for each Salem defendant, designated as cases 264–267 in the Supreme Court’s October Term 1938.

95. Sarah Pease, “President’s Report,” 2 June 1938, PPLC-F; Hilda C. Standish, “Medical Report,” 14 June 1938, PPLC 39-D; Bridgeport Telegram, 3 June 1938; untitled 2pp. memo, n.d., in both Upson Papers and PPLC 2-E; Pease to Clarence Gamble, n.d. [c.September/October 1938], Gamble 6–116. Born 4 October 1909, William A. Goodrich’s obituaries appear in the Hartford Courant, 12 February 1959, p. 8, and in the 13 February New Haven Register. Also see Yale’s History of the Class of 1931, p. 229, and Garrow conversations with John W. McTernan and with Dr. Goodrich’s widow, who later remarried, Elizabeth Dennett [Goodrich] Scafarello, as well as Garrow’s interview with Roger B. and Rosalie Nelson. On Charles L. Larkin, Sr., in addition to a Garrow conversation with his son, Charles L. Larkin, Jr., see his obituary in the Waterbury American, 9 February 1967, and a memorial notice in Connecticut Medicine 31 (June 1967): 457. No reference whatsoever to the birth control clinic appears in the surviving Minute Book for the Waterbury Hospital’s Board of Directors for 1938–1939 (pp. 492–503), or in the minutes and annual reports of the Hospital’s Medical and Surgical Staff, or in the annual reports that were prepared by Henry Mason, and by Jeannie Heppel for the Chase Dispensary. Heppel’s annual reports for the period regularly thank the Junior League for providing clinic volunteers. See Waterbury Hospital’s 48th, 49th, 50th, and 51st Annual Reports, for the years ending October 1, 1937, 1938, 1939, and 1940, particularly pp. 51–52, 49–50, 53–54, and 54–55, respectively. It may well be that most substantive business was conducted by the Board’s Executive Committee, for which no minutes survive and for which no minutes may ever have been taken.

96. Gardner v. Massachusetts, 305 U.S. 559 (“appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question”); New York Herald Tribune, 11 October 1938; Dodge to Hawkridge, 13 October 1938, PPLM Box 9; Journal of Contraception, November 1938, pp. 203, 215; Birth Control Review, November 1938, p. 129, December 1938, pp. 139–140, and January 1939, p. 156; Minutes, BCLM Executive Committee, 17 October 1938, PPLM Box 26; Ernst and Pickett, Birth Control In the Courts, pp. 41–42, 45; Harriet F. Pilpel, “Memorandum Regarding the United States Supreme Court’s Dismissal of the Massachusetts Birth Control Case,” 18 October 1938, Upson Papers; “Abstract of Mr. Ernst’s Remarks,” 19 October 1938, PPLM Box 106; Ernst to Hawkridge, 20 October 1938, PPLM Box 10; Lindey to Ernst, 21 October 1938, Ernst Box 361; Lindey to Hawkridge, 22 October 1938, PPLM Box 13; Ernst to Hawkridge, 22 October 1938, and 27 October 1938, PPLM Box 10; Minutes, BCLM “President’s Council,” 27 October 1938, PPLM Box 26; Davis to Hepburn, 31 October 1938, PPLM Box 11; Hawkridge, “Legal Conversations,” 2 November-25 November 1938, PPLM Box 85; Lindey, “Re: Massachusetts Birth Control,” 15 November 1938, Ernst Box 893; Dodge to Ernst, 18 November 1938, PPLM Box 9; Minutes, BCLM Executive Committee, 18 November 1938, PPLM Box 26; Lindey to Hawkridge, 29 November 1938, Lindey to Lydia A. DeVilbiss, 30 November 1938, and Lindey to Mary M. White, 3 December 1938, PPLM Box 13; John Price Jones Corporation, “Survey, Analysis and Plan of Action—Birth Control League of Massachusetts,” 10 December 1938, 205pp., Ernst Box 362; Minutes, BCLM Executive Committee, 20 December 1938, PPLM Box 26; Ernst to White, 4 January 1939, PPLM Box 10; White, “… 1938 in Review,” 11 January 1939, PPLM Box 26; Lindey to Hawkridge, 13 April 1939, PPLM Box 13; Hawkridge to Lindey, 17 April 1939, Ernst Box 893; Journal of Contraception, May 1939, pp. 119–120; Loraine Campbell to Ernst, 11 May 1939, PPLM Box 6; Ernst to Campbell, 12 May 1939, PPLM Box 10; Campbell, “Memorandum of Meeting with Mr. Samuel Hoar,” 18 May 1939, PPLM Box 6; Ernst to Hoar, 19 May 1939, PPLM Box 10; Campbell to Hoar, and Campbell to Ernst, 23 June 1939, PPLM Box 6.

Dr. Ilia Galleani, the sole defendant in the Brookline case, very reluctantly pled guilty and paid a $100 fine on 19 December 1938. Also see Ernst and Lindey, The Censor Marches On, pp. 172–173, and four law review notes critical of the Gardner outcome: New York University Law Quarterly Review 16 (November 1938): 149–150; Michigan Law Review 37 (December 1938): 317–320; George Washington Law Review 7 (December 1938): 255–257; and “Contraceptives and the Law,” University of Chicago Law Review 6 (February 1939): 260–269.

97. U.S. v. Jose S. Belavel et al., U.S.D.C. D.P.R., #4589 CR, 19 January 1939. Never officially reported in the Federal Supplement, a copy of Judge Cooper’s nine-page opinion does exist in the Upson Papers. Also see Journal of Contraception, February 1939, p. 37; Ernst and Pickett, Birth Control In the Courts, pp. 34–36; and Doone and Greer Williams, Every Child A Wanted Child, pp. 162–163.

98. New York Times, 19 January 1939, p. 15; Reed, The Birth Control Movement, p. 265; Chesler, Woman of Valor, pp. 381–385, 391–393; “Report of Waterbury Maternal Health Center,” 11 October 1938 to 1 June 1939, PPLC 10-G and 48-B; Lois W. Stringfield, “Minutes,” CBCL Board, 24 October 1938 and 5 December 1938, PPLC 10-F; Sarah Pease, “Annual Report,” 18–20 January 1939, PPLC 10-G; Hartford Courant, 31 January 1939, p. 3; Barbara Hubbard, Minutes, Hartford MHC Executive Committee, 1 June 1939, PPLC 39-E; Barbara Molstad, “Report of the New Haven Clinic,” 8 June 1939, “Hartford County Annual Report,” 8 June 1939, PPLC 10-G; Pease, “President’s Report,” Hartford MHC, 8 June 1939, and Standish, “Clinic Report,” 8 June 1939, PPLC 39-E.

99. Garrow conversations with Virginia J. Goss, Deirdre Carmody, and Anthony Fitzgerald; William B. Fitzgerald to J. Warren Upson, 28 June 1939, Upson Papers; [Sallie Pease], untitled 3pp. typescript, “July, 1939,” PPFA Box 39; Pease, “President’s Report,” 8 June 1939, PPLC 10-G; Pease, “Annual Report of the President,” 26 June 1940, PPLC 10-K; Woodbridge E. Morris, “Connecticut Situation,” 13 June 1939, Gamble 6–117; Morris to A. N. Creadick, 15 June 1939, PPFA Box 38. Born in 1904, Edward T. Carmody, like Bill Fitzgerald, who was two years older, was a fervent Roman Catholic. Warren Upson’s obituary appears in the Waterbury Republican-American, 15 March 1992, pp. A1, A11; also see a Waterbury Republican Magazine profile, 16 September 1984, pp. 4–5.

100. Upson Interviews with Brecher, Garrow, and Hubbell; Coyle, “The Waterbury Conspiracy Scandal,” pp. 13–14; Waterbury Republican, 4 November 1936, p. 1; Waterbury Democrat, 16 June 1939, p. 1; Beaman, Fat Man in a Phone Booth, pp. 71–72. The court decisions voiding the voter registration frauds are cited fully in note seven above. Years later Warren Upson would be the second Waterbury attorney named to the prestigious American College of Trial Lawyers; Bill Fitzgerald had been the first. Waterbury Republican, 5 April 1960.

101. Waterbury American, 13 June 1939, p. 2, 14 June 1939, p. 2; Waterbury Democrat, 13 June 1939, pp. 1, 7, 14 June 1939, p. 1, 15 June 1939, p. 1; Morris to A. N. Creadick, 15 June 1939, PPFA Box 38; Sanger to Creadick, 15 June 1939, Rose Papers Box 41; Upson, untitled sheet of notes headed “6/15/39,” [Lewis], untitled, undated 2pp. sheet of notes headed “Upson,” and [Upson], “Memorandum for the file,” 16 June 1939, 3pp., Upson Papers; Garrow Interviews with Upson and Roger B. Nelson; also Eleanor Searle to Upson, and Pilpel to Upson, 15 June 1939, Upson Papers.

102. Waterbury Democrat, 17 June 1939, pp. 1, 2, 19 June 1939, pp. 1, 4, 21 June 1939, p. 1; Bridgeport Herald, 18 June 1939; Pease, “Annual Report,” 26 June 1940, PPLC 10-K; Upson to Pilpel, 19 June 1939, Upson Papers; Waterbury American, 19 June 1939, pp. 1, 10, 20 June 1939, p. 3; Waterbury Republican, 20 June 1939, p. 2, 21 June 1939, p. 4, 22 June 1939, p. 3; Record, State of Connecticut v. Certain Contraceptive Materials, Connecticut Supreme Court, January Term 1940, #1780; “Statement of Mrs. Clara McTernan,” 19 June 1939 (and paginated 174 to 203), Upson Papers; Upson to Pease, 19 June 1939, Upson to Roger B. Nelson, 19 June 1939, and Pease to Upson, n.d. [20 June 1939], Upson Papers. In private, Pease was somewhat less enthusiastic, telling the president of the Massachusetts League that “We are particularly sorry that Waterbury was the city selected for a test case because it is predominantly Catholic and the clinic had been opened such a short time.” Pease to Linda Hawkridge, 29 June 1939, PPLM Box 14. No transcript of Ginny Goss’s interrogation has survived, nor have any copies of the earlier questioning of women patients, but the pagination of McTernan’s statement indicates that Fitzgerald already had taken at least 173 pages of statements prior to Mrs. McTernan’s appearance. The Waterbury Hospital’s Board of Directors held a regular quarterly meeting at 1:30 p.m. on Monday, June 19, but the minimalist minutes make no reference to any discussion of the clinic controversy. Waterbury Hospital Board Minute Book, pp. 498–499. The board’s Executive Committee had last met on June 5.

103. Upson to Barker, 20 June 1939, Barker to Upson, 21 June 1939, Upson to Pilpel, 20 June 1939, Creadick to Upson, 21 June 1939, Upson to Pease, 22 June 1939, Transcript of Proceedings, State v. McTernan et al., 23 June 1939, 4pp., Upson Papers; Waterbury Superior Court Criminal Docket Book, #6222–6224; Lois Stringfield, Minutes, CBCL Board, 22 June 1939, PPLC 10-G; Waterbury Democrat, 23 June 1939, pp. 1, 8, 24 June 1939, p. 3; Waterbury American, 23 June 1939, p. 1, 24 June 1939, p. 1; Hartford Times, 23 June 1939; Waterbury Republican, 24 June 1939, pp. 1, 3; Hartford Courant, 24 June 1939, pp. 1, 4; New York Herald Tribune, 24 June 1939. Also see Pease to Clarence Gamble, 20 June 1939, Gamble to Pease, 21 June 1939, and Leah Cadbury to Pease, 22 June 1939, Gamble 6–117. On Kenneth Wynne, see a 7 July 1957 New Haven Register profile, as well as obituaries in the Waterbury American, 20 August 1971, p. 6; New Haven Register, 20 August 1971; Hartford Courant, 21 August 1971, p. 4; and particularly J. Warren Upson’s “Obituary Sketch of Kenneth Wynne,” published as an appendix at 161 Conn. 612. Also Garrow conversations with Upson and with William J. Secor, Jr. (Wynne’s son-in-law), and G.C. Edgar, “Insurgents in Connecticut,” The Nation 135 (26 October 1932): 395–396.

104. “Memorandum of Medical Indications of Persons in Case of State vs. McTernan,” n.d., 5pp; [Fitzgerald], “Statement of Facts—State vs. Clara L. McTernan, William A. Goodrich, Roger B. Nelson,” n.d., 12pp., Pilpel to Upson, 26 June 1939, Upson to Pilpel, 27 June 1939, Upson to Fitzgerald, 27 June 1939, Fitzgerald to Upson, 28 June 1939, “Report of Mrs. A. L. Wasserman,” n.d., 1pp., “Memorandum Re Birth Control Cases,” 26 June 1939, 19pp. (two copies, one annotated by Goodrich, the other by Nelson), Upson to Morris, 29 June 1939, Upson to Pease, 29 June 1939, Upson to Creadick, 29 June 1939, Upson to Pilpel, 29 June 1939, Upson to Lucius F. Robinson, Jr., 29 June 1939, Upson to Morris Tyler, 29 June 1939, Upson to Johnson Stoddard, 29 June 1939, Upson to Eleanor Searle, 30 June 1939, Upson Papers. Also see Tyler to Morris, 27 June 1939, PPFA Box 38; Gilbert Colgate, “Minutes,” BCFA Executive Committee, 27 June 1939, Gamble 134–2339; Upson to Catherine Tilson, 28 June 1939, and Tilson to Upson, 30 June 1939, Upson Papers.

105. Fitzgerald, “Amended Information,” 29 June 1939, Upson, “Demurrer to Information,” 29 June 1939, Upson Papers; Waterbury Democrat, 29 June 1939, pp. 1, 4, 3 July 1939, pp. 1, 4; Waterbury American, 29 June 1939, pp. 1, 12, 3 July 1939, pp. 1, 7; Waterbury Republican, 30 June 1939, p. 2, 1 July 1939, pp. 1, 12, 2 July 1939, p. 20, 4 July 1939, p. 2; Hartford Courant, 30 June 1939, p. 7; Morris to Tyler, 3 July 1939, PPFA Box 38; Upson to Pease, 3 July 1939, PPLC 3-D and Upson Papers.

106. Hereward Wake, “Memo of Discussion … July 8th,” 11 July 1939, and untitled Johnson Stoddard memo, 26 July 1939, Upson Papers; “Statement on Connecticut Situation,” 14 July 1939, Gamble 6–117; Upson to Morris Tyler, 10 July 1939, Upson to Caroline K. Simon, 10 July 1939, Simon to Upson, 11 July 1939, Tyler to Upson, 12 July 1939, Upson to Wake, 14 July 1939, Upson Papers; “Birth Control Probe Bares Racket,” Bridgeport Herald, 9 July 1939, p. 1; Garrow Interview with Roger and Rosalie Nelson; Upson, “Brief on Demurrer,” State of Connecticut v. Roger B. Nelson, 25 July 1939, Upson Papers and PPLC 2-F; Upson, “Respondent’s Brief on Motion to Dismiss,” In re Condemnation of Contraceptive Materials, 25 July 1939, Upson Papers and PPLC 2-G; Waterbury Democrat, 22 July 1939, p. 1, 25 July 1939, p. 2, 26 July 1939, p. 4; Waterbury American, 25 July 1939, pp. 1, 16; Waterbury Republican, 26 July 1939, p. 4. Also see Sarah Pease, “Birth Control and Sunday Shaving Illegal in State,” Waterbury Republican, 16 July 1939, p. 8, and Pease, untitled 3pp. memo, 20 July 1939, PPLC 1-B; Pilpel to Upson, 27 July 1939, and Creadick to Upson, 27 July 1939, Upson Papers. The Wisconsin case, State ex rel Larkin v. Ryan, 70 Wisc. 676, 36 N.W. 823, 825, had held that “there can be no lawful punishment of mere drunkenness, so long as it is concealed in strict privacy, without any exposure to or interference with the public or any individual. In other words, that strictly private and concealed vice of the individual cannot be lawfully made a public offense.” Also see Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital, 105 N.E. 92, 93 (1914), where future Supreme Court Justice Benjamin N. Cardozo, writing for the New York Court of Appeals, stated that “Every human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body.” Upson also cited the liberty language used in two well-known U.S. Supreme Court decisions, Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399 (1923), and Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, 535 (1925).

107. Fitzgerald, “State’s Brief on Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss,” State of Connecticut v. Certain Contraceptive Materials, 29 July 1939, 18pp., and “State’s Consolidated Memorandum of Authorities on Demurrers,” State of Connecticut v. Roger B. Nelson et al., 29 July 1939, 14pp., Upson Papers; Waterbury Democrat, 29 July 1939, p. 1; Waterbury American, 29 July 1939, pp. 1, 7; Waterbury Republican, 30 July 1939, p. 3, 5 August 1939, pp. 1, 4; McEvoy to Fitzgerald and Upson, 31 July 1939, Upson to McEvoy, 31 July 1939, McEvoy to Fitzgerald and Upson (II), 31 July 1939, Upson to Caroline K. Simon, 1 August 1939, Upson to Creadick, 1 August 1939, Upson to Stoddard, 4 August 1939, Upson Papers.

108. State of Connecticut v. Roger B. Nelson et al., 7 Conn. Supp. 262, 264; Waterbury Democrat, 7 August 1939, pp. 1, 4; Waterbury American, 7 August 1939, pp. 1, 7; Waterbury Republican, 8 August 1939, pp. 1, 4; Hartford Courant, 8 August 1939, pp. 1, 4; New York Times, 8 August 1939; New York Herald Tribune, 8 August 1939; Upson to Pease, 7 August 1939, Upson to McTernan, 7 August 1939, Upson to Caroline Simon, 11 August 1939, Upson Papers; Upson to Caroline Simon, 14 August 1939, PPFA Box 38. Also see James W. Cooper to Upson, and Morris L. Ernst to Upson, 21 August 1939, Upson Papers; Hartford Times, 8 August 1939, p. 14, and 11 August 1939, p. 10; Journal of Contraception 4 (August/September 1939): 170–171; and the Journal of the Connecticut State Medical Society 3 (September 1939): 513, which praised Wynne for “his realistic opinion” and “fine understanding.”

109. McTernan to Upson, 22 August 1939, Upson Papers; Time, 28 August 1939, p. 18; Coyle, “The Waterbury Conspiracy Scandal,” pp. 44–70; Penelope Huse note about 17 August New Milford Times, PPFA Box 39; State of Connecticut v. Certain Contraceptive Materials, 7 Conn. Supp. 264, 276, 284; Waterbury American, 23 August 1939, p. 1, 24 August 1939, p. 3; Waterbury Republican, 24 August 1939, pp. 1, 8; Hartford Courant, 24 August 1939, p. 1, 26 August 1939, p. 6; Waterbury Democrat, 24 August 1939, p. 11; Upson to Ernst, 24 August 1939, Upson Papers; Hartford Times, 25 August 1939, p. 14. Also see Edna McKinnon to Clarence Gamble, 4 August, 17 August, 18 August, 19 August and 25 August 1939, Gamble 135–2347; and McKinnon, “Report of Talk with Mr. Morris Ernst,” 22 August 1939, PPFA Box 38.

110. Upson to McTernan, 24 August 1939, McTernan to Upson, 29 August 1939, Upson to McTernan, 31 August 1939, Upson to Caroline Simon, 29 August 1939, Simon to Upson, 30 August 1939, Upson to Simon, 31 August 1939, Upson to Pease, 1 September 1939, Upson Papers; “Suggested Plan of Publicity Campaign,” 29 August 1939, PPLC 10-G; untitled 2pp. handwritten memo, n.d., Upson Papers; Pease, “Letter to the Board of Waterbury Hospital” [draft], n.d., and “Corrected Statement …” 6 September 1939, PPLC 2-E. Also see Lawrence Lewis to Pease, 7 September 1939, PPLC 2-A, and Eleanor Searle to Caroline Simon, 18 September 1939, PPLC 48-B.

111. Transcript of Proceedings, State v. Nelson et al., 21 September 1939, 7pp., Upson Papers; Waterbury Democrat, 21 September 1939, p. 5, 22 September 1939, pp. 1, 8, 26 September 1939, p. 3; Waterbury Republican, 22 September 1939, p. 15, 23 September 1939, p. 7; Waterbury American, 22 September 1939, pp. 1, 10, 26 September 1939, p. 3; Upson to Morris, 22 September 1939, PPLC 2-A; Upson to Mabel Wood, and Maltbie to Fitzgerald and Upson, 26 September 1939, Upson Papers. Also see Journal of Contraception 4 (October 1939): 200; Upson to Howard Phillips, 28 September 1939, Phillips to Upson, 2 October and 17 October 1939, and Upson to Phillips, 18 October 1939, Upson Papers. On William M. Maltbie, see his Hartford Courant obituary, 16 December 1961, pp. 1, 2, and particularly Justice Howard W. Alcorn’s “Obituary Sketch” of Maltbie, published as an appendix at 148 Conn. 740.

112. Morris Tyler to Florence Darrach, 29 September 1939, Upson to Tyler, 30 September 1939, Upson to Pease, 30 September 1939, Upson, “Memorandum,” 2 October 1939, Upson to McTernan, 2 October 1939, [Upson], “Memorandum for Mr. Lewis,” 6 October 1939, Upson Papers; Lindey to Morris, 6 October 1939, PPFA Box 38; Upson to Lindey, 10 October 1939, [Upson], “Memorandum for the File,” 13 October 1939, Lindey to Upson, 23 October 1939, Upson to Lindey, 25 October 1939, Tyler to Upson, 27 October 1939, Upson to Tyler, 28 October 1939, Fitzgerald to Maltbie, 27 October 1939, Maltbie to Wynne, 31 October 1939, Fitzgerald to Wynne, 31 October 1939, Fitzgerald to Upson, 31 October 1939, Upson to Lindey, 1 and 2 November 1939, Upson to McTernan, Goodrich, and Nelson, 1 November 1939, Upson to Tyler, 1 November, Upson Papers; Penelope Huse note on 2 November 1939 Winsted Citizen, PPFA Box 39; Waterbury American, 3 November 1939, p. 1, 4 November 1939, p. 4; Lindey to Upson, 3 November 1939, Record in State v. Nelson and in State v. McTernan & Goodrich, Upson Papers; Waterbury Republican, 4 November 1939, pp. 1, 4, 9 November 1939; New York Herald Tribune, 4 November 1939; Waterbury Democrat, 4 November 1939, p. 1, 9 November 1939; Upson to Pease, 3 November 1939, Upson to Lindey, 4 and 7 November 1939, Lindey to Upson, 6 November 1939, Upson Papers; Tyler to Morris, 8 November 1939, PPFA Box 38.

113. Eleanor Searle, Minutes, CBCL Board, 22 September 1939, PPLC 10-G; McKinnon to Morris, 22 September 1939, McKinnon, “Connecticut Activities Outlined, September 22 to October 12, 1939,” 3pp., and McKinnon, “Report of Connecticut Activities, Sept. 22 to Oct. 12, 1939,” 10pp., Gamble 6–118; Hartford Courant, 23 September 1939, p. 4; McKinnon to Gamble, and to Mary Compton, 25 September 1939, Gamble 135–2347 and 6–118; Tyler to Upson, 29 September 1939, Upson to Tyler, and to Stoddard, 30 September 1939, Upson Papers; McKinnon to Wood, 5 October 1939, Gamble 6–118; Waterbury Republican, 11 October 1939, p. 1, 22 October 1939, p. 2; Waterbury American, 11 October 1939, p. 20; Waterbury Democrat, 11 October 1939, p. 5; Upson to Pease, 19 October 1939, Tyler to Stoddard, 19 October 1939, Stoddard to Pease, 21 and 23 October 1939, PPLC 2-A; Upson to Stoddard, 26 October 1939, Upson Papers; McKinnon, “Connecticut—Work Accomplished,” 4 November 1939, Gamble 6–118; Creadick et al., “The Right to Practice is in Jeopardy,” Journal of the Connecticut State Medical Society 3 (November 1939): 616–617, 635; Journal of Contraception 4 (November 1939): 224; Upson to Pease, 3 November 1939, Stoddard to Upson, and Pease to Stoddard, 6 November 1939, Tyler to Upson, 6 November 1939, Upson Papers; Pease to Town and County Chairmen, 10 November 1939, and Lois Stringfield, “Minutes,” CBCL Board, 20 November 1939, PPLC 10-G; McKinnon to Morris, 15 November 1939, and Lindey to Morris, 17 November 1939, PPFA Box 38. On Edna Rankin McKinnon, who was born in 1893, earned both undergraduate and law degrees at the University of Montana, and died in 1978, the best source is Wilma Dykeman, Too Many People, Too Little Love—Edna Rankin McKinnon: Pioneer for Birth Control (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1974), a nonscholarly biography which includes no references to McKinnon’s many contacts with the Connecticut activists. Also see Hannah Josephson, Jeanette Rankin (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1974); and Ted C. Harris, Jeanette Rankin (New York: Arno Press, 1982), a reprint of a 1972 dissertation.

114. Upson to Pease, and to McTernan, 21 November 1939, Upson Papers; Tyler to Morris, 22 November 1939, Upson to Greenbaum, Wolff & Ernst, 25 November 1939, Morris to Lindey, 29 November 1939, PPFA Box 38; Stoddard to Upson, 29 November 1939, Upson Papers; Stoddard to CBCL, 29 November 1939, Lindey to Upson, 30 November 1939, Upson to Lindey, 1 December 1939, PPLC 2-A; Upson to Morris, 1 December 1939, Lindey to Upson, 4 December 1939, Upson to Lindey, 5 December 1939, Janney to Creadick, 8 December 1939, Creadick to Upson, 11 December 1939, Upson to Creadick, 12 December 1939, Creadick to Janney, 12 December 1939, Creadick to Upson, 13 December 1939, Janney to Creadick, 14 December 1939, Janney to Upson, 18 December 1939, Upson Papers; Janney, Frederick H. Wiggin and Huntington T. Day, “Petition and Brief of Amici Curiae,” State of Connecticut v. Roger B. Nelson et al., Connecticut Supreme Court, January Term 1940, #1803–1805, A-144 II 351–374. Also see Janney to Charles E. Scribner, 8 February 1940, PPFA Box 38.

115. Upson and William J. Secor, Jr., “Respondent’s Appeal,” State of Connecticut v. Certain Contraceptive Materials, Connecticut Supreme Court, January Term 1940, #1780, 99pp., Upson and Secor, “Brief of Appellee,” State of Connecticut v. Roger B. Nelson et al., Connecticut Supreme Court, January Term 1940, #1803–1805, 66pp., esp. p. 41, Upson Papers; Fitzgerald, “Brief of Appellant,” State v. Roger B. Nelson et al., esp. pp. 9, 17–19, and “Brief of Appellant,” State v. Certain Contraceptive Materials, A-144 II 335–350 and A-144 II 256–265. Bill Secor, a Waterbury native and a brand-new graduate of Yale Law School, joined the Bronson firm several weeks after the June 1939 raid and became Upson’s principal assistant on the case; see Waterbury Democrat, 10 July 1939, p. 2.

116. Waterbury Republican, 28 December 1939, p. 2, 5 January 1940, p. 5; Waterbury American, 4 January 1940, pp. 1, 6; Waterbury Democrat, 4 January 1940, p. 8; Hartford Courant, 5 January 1940, p. 6; Hartford Times, 5 January 1940, p. 17; Upson to Morris, 4 January 1940, PPFA Box 38; Upson to Greenbaum, Wolff & Ernst, 4 January 1940, Upson to Janney, and to Pease, 4 January 1940, Upson to Lindey, 8 January 1940, Upson to McWilliams, 8 January 1940, Janney to Upson, 8 January 1940, Lindey to Upson, 8 January 1940, Morris to Upson, 15 January 1940, Upson Papers; Pease, “Annual Report,” 26 June 1940, PPLC 10-K; Janney to Pease, 11 January 1940, PPLC 2-A; Lois Stringfield, Minutes, CBCL Board, 15 January 1940, PPLC 10-H; Eleanor Searle to Eugene L. Belisle, 22 January 1940, PPLM Box 106; Janney to Gilbert Colgate, 7 February 1940, and Janney to Morris, 9 May 1940, PPFA Boxes 52 and 38.

117. On William Maltbie, see his Hartford Courant obituary, 16 December 1961, pp. 1, 2, and the sketch published as an appendix at 148 Conn. 740. On Jennings, see his Courant obituary, 28 February 1965, pp. 1, 4, Raymond E. Baldwin’s sketch published at 152 Conn. 749, and the National Cyclopedia of American Biography 52 (1970): 576. George Hinman’s Courant obituary is 20 March 1961, p. 4, and a sketch by later Chief Justice John H. King is at 148 Conn. 737. Allyn L. Brown’s sketch of Avery appears at 143 Conn. 735, and Avery’s Courant obituary is 7 May 1956, p. 4. Brown’s own Courant obituary is 23 October 1973, p. 4; also see 164 Conn. 713. My retrospective understanding of the Connecticut court has benefitted substantially from two September 1991 conversations with Hartford attorney Wesley W. Horton; also see Mary L. Dudziak, “Just Say No: Birth Control in the Connecticut Supreme Court Before Griswold v. Connecticut,” Iowa Law Review 75 (May 1990): 915–939, at 930–931, and also in Paul Finkelman and Stephen E. Gottlieb, eds., Toward a Usable Past (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1991), pp. 304–338.

118. Pease, “Annual Report,” 24 January 1940, PPLC 10-H; Ralph W. Ely to Hartford Birth Control Clinic, 31 January 1940, and Hilda C. Standish to Ely, 2 February 1940, PPLC 40-B; Hartford Courant, 12 March 1940, p. 2; Newsweek, 5 February 1940, p. 29; Upson to Morris, 26 February 1940, and Morris to Upson, 29 February 1940, Upson Papers; Eleanor Searle, Minutes, CBCL Future Policies Committee, New York, 28 February 1940, PPLC 1-L.

119. State v. Nelson, 126 Conn. 412, 418, 422, 424, 426, 11 A.2d 856; State v. Certain Contraceptive Materials, 126 Conn. 428, 11 A.2d 863. Critical notes on the Nelson decision include Human Fertility 5 (April 1940): 44–45; University of Detroit Law Journal 3 (May 1940): 216–218; Boston University Law Review 20 (June 1940): 551–554; Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 31 (September-October 1940): 312–314; Journal of the American Medical Association, 14 September 1940, p. 962.

120. Waterbury American, 20 March 1940, pp. 1, 10; Waterbury Democrat, 20 March 1940, pp. 1, 4; Hartford Times, 20 March 1940; Waterbury Republican, 21 March 1940, pp. 1, 10; Hartford Courant, 21 March 1940, pp. 1, 2; Greenwich Press, 21 March 1940, pp. 1, 8.

CHAPTER TWO

1. News and Observer, 21 March 1940 and Des Moines Tribune, 25 March 1940, both quoted in BCFA press release, n.d. [c.1 April 1940], PPFA Box 39; Waterbury Democrat, 21 March 1940, pp. 6, 10, 22 March 1940, p. 2, 23 March 1940, pp. 1, 2, 25 March 1940, p. 3; Waterbury American, 21 March 1940, pp. 1, 11, 22 March 1940, pp. 1, 10; New York Times, 21 March 1940; New York Herald Tribune, 21 March 1940; Florence Rose to Sanger, 21 March 1940 (II), Rose Box 41; Waterbury Republican, 22 March 1940, p. 17, 23 March 1940, p. 18, 25 March 1940, pp. 1, 4; Hartford Courant, 22 March 1940, p. 12, 23 March 1940, p. 10; Upson to Pease, 23 March 1940, Upson to Ernst, 25 March 1940, Morris to Upson, 26 March 1940, Upson Papers; Bridgeport Herald, 24 March 1940. Also see Creadick to Upson, 21 March 1940, Fitzgerald to Upson, 23 March 1940, Upson to McTernan, 25 March 1940, Upson Papers; Hartford Times, 21 March 1940, p. 14; Ridgefield Press, 28 March 1940; Catholic Transcript, 28 March 1940, p. 1.

2. Lois Stringfield, Minutes, CBCL Board, 25 March 1940, PPLC 10-H; Hartford Courant, 26 March 1940, pp. 1, 10; Waterbury Republican, 26 March 1940, pp. 1, 4; Waterbury Democrat, 26 March 1940, p. 3; Charles Magill Smith, “Memorandum to Mrs. John Q. Tilson …” 25 March 1940, 4pp., PPFA Box 39; [Pease, Hepburn, et al.], untitled memo, n.d. [c.26 March 1940], Gamble 6–117; Darrach, Annotated Copy of Smith’s March 25 memo, Winslow Box 96; Gilbert Colgate, “Minutes of Executive Committee,” BCFA, 26 March 1940, Winslow Box 95; Rose to Sanger, 27 March 1940, Rose Box 41; [Smith], “Facts About the Connecticut Situation …” 29 March 1940, Sanger-LC Box 176. Also see Pease to Tilson, 1 March 1940, PPFA Box 38.

3. Waterbury American, 26 March 1940, p. 2, 27 March 1940, p. 1, 29 March 1940, pp. 1, 2; Fitzgerald motion and McEvoy order, 27 March 1940, PPLC 2-J; Waterbury Democrat, 27 March 1940, pp. 1, 2; Upson to Pease, and to Creadick, 27 March 1940, Creadick to Upson, 28 March 1940, Upson, “Memorandum for Mr. Secor,” 27 March 1940, Upson Papers. Also see Hartford Courant, 27 March 1940, p. 10; Luke B. Lockwood to Florence Darrach, 27 March 1940, PPLC 2-B.

4. Upson to Ernst, 29 March 1940, Upson Papers; Upson Interviews with Brecher and Garrow; Garrow interviews with William J. Secor, Jr., Roger and Rosalie Nelson, Elizabeth [Goodrich] Scafarello, John W. McTernan, and Anthony Fitzgerald; Waterbury Democrat, 29 March 1940, p. 7, 1 April 1940, pp. 1, 4, 2 April 1940, p. 1, 3 April 1940, p. 5; Waterbury American, 2 April 1940, p. 16, 3 April 1940, p. 9; Waterbury Republican, 3 April 1940, pp. 1, 4; Hartford Courant, 3 April 1940, p. 3; Human Fertility 5 (April 1940): 59–62; Upson to Ernst, 3 April 1940, Upson to McTernan, 5 April 1940, Upson Papers. Also see Upson to McTernan, 19 March 1941, Upson Papers.

5. Garrow interviews with Elizabeth [Goodrich] Scafarello, Roger and Rosalie Nelson, John W. McTernan, and Anthony Fitzgerald.

6. Mabel Robbins, Minutes, Hartford MHC Board, 28 March 1940, and Pease to “Dear Patient,” n.d., PPLC 39-E; Hartford Courant, 29 March 1940, p. 5; Sanger to Pease, 30 March 1940, Sanger-SS; Sanger to Morris, 30 March 1940, PPFA Box 38. Also see Colgate to Executive Committee Members, 29 March 1940, Sanger-LC Box 176; Rose to Morris, 30 March and 1 April 1940, PPFA Box 38; Upson to Morris, 1 April 1940, PPLC 2-A and Upson Papers; Lucy Smith, Minutes, Hartford MHC Board, 3 June 1940, and especially Mabel H. Robbins, “Clinic Report,” 18 June 1940, PPLC 39-E, who noted: “The patients promise all kinds of secrecy if we will only furnish it to them. It has been very hard not to weaken, especially while the supplies were still in the closet.”

7. Colgate, “Minutes of Special Meeting of Executive Committee,” BCFA, 4 April 1940, and Richard Pierson, “Minutes,” BCFA Board, 4 April 1940, Winslow Box 95; Ernst to Pease, 5 April 1940, PPLC 2-C.

8. Catherine Tilson, “Minutes of Joint Meeting,” and “Preliminary Draft of Minutes of Joint Meeting,” 6 April 1940, PPLC 10-H and 2-A; Standish Interviews with Nichols, Garrow, and Hubbell; Standish to Judy Frew, 13 June 1985, PPLC 25-E; Hartford Courant, 7 July 1970, p. 1, 29 April 1973; West Hartford News, 20 September 1979; Clarence J. Gamble to Hilda Standish, and to Edna McKinnon, 9 April 1940, Gamble 6–119 and 138–2375; Hartford Courant, 1 April 1940, p. 4; McKinnon to Gamble, 10 April 1940, Gamble 6–119; Gamble to Sanger, 10 and 12 April 1940, Gamble 195–3090; Sanger to Gamble, n.d. [c.15 April 1940], Gamble 195–3090; Sanger to Stuart Mudd, 15 April 1940, Sanger-SS; Gamble to Sanger, 23 April 1940, Gamble 195–3090; Ernst to Sanger, 30 April 1940, Ernst Box 363. Concerning Sanger, see particularly Harriet F. Pilpel, “Birth Control Federation,” 10 May 1940, Ernst Box 363, detailing an 8 May conversation between Sanger, Ernst, Lindey, and Pilpel that included “a full discussion of the Connecticut case. Many of the facts seemed to surprise Mrs. Sanger, who had apparently been misinformed by various members of the Federation.… She believes that the National group should have complete say as to local legal problems. We explained to her that actually it was better in the Connecticut situation that [the] Federation did not have any such power since by and large the Connecticut forces were more aggressive and courageous than the Federation.”

9. Bronson, Lewis, Bronson, and Upson to CBCL, “Statement,” 6 April 1940, [Upson], “Memorandum to Members of the Firm,” and [Bronson], “Memorandum to Members of the Firm,” 30 April 1940, Hepburn to Upson, 9 May 1940, Upson Papers.

10. Lois Stringfield, Minutes, CBCL Future Policies Committee, 11 April 1940, PPLC 10-H; Winslow to Morris, and to Harriet Janney, 15 April 1940, Winslow Box 95; Pease to Ernst, 22 April 1940, PPLC 2-C; Edward E. Ottenheimer et al., “Report …” n.d. [c.22 April 1940], PPLC 2-A and 10-H; Eleanor Searle, Minutes, CBCL Board, 24 April 1940, PPLC 10-H; Stenotypist’s Transcript, “Special Meeting of the Board …” 24 April 1940, 26pp., PPLC 10-I; Pilpel to Pease, 25 April 1940, PPLC 2-C. A thirty-eight-year-old graduate of Yale who had worked for JPJ for fifteen years, Rose passed away at age sixty-one on 2 August 1963.

11. Eleanor Searle, Minutes, CBCL Steering Committee, 3 May and 21 May 1940, PPLC 10-J; [Franklin], “Notes on Meeting …” 13 May 1940, PPLC 1-L; Catherine Tilson to Franklin, 22 May 1940, PPLC 8-J; Hartford Courant, 22 May 1940, p. 12, 23 May 1940, pp. 1, 6; Franklin: “Interview with J. Warren Upson,” 23 May 1940, PPLC 2-L; “Interview with Mr. Frederick H. Wiggin,” 24 May 1940, PPLC 8-H; “Interview with Judge Carroll Hincks,” 24 May 1940, PPLC 2-L; “Interview with Judge Albert Bill,” 28 May 1940, PPLC 2-L; “Interview with Mr. Moses Berkman,” 29 May 1940, PPLC 8-H; “Interview with Lucius Robinson, Jr.,” 6 June 1940, PPLC 2-L; “Interview with William Hanna,” 8 June 1940, PPLC 2-L; “Interview with Robbins B. Stoeckel,” 8 June 1940, PPLC 2-M; “Interview with Mr. Horace D. Taft,” 10 June 1940, PPLC 2-L; “Interview with Mr. Raymond J. Dunne,” 11 June 1940, PPLC 2-M; Mr. Redfield to Mr. Franklin, 10 June 1940, PPLC 2-M.

12. “Agenda,” 10 June 1940, Sanger-LC Box 180; “Minutes,” CBCL Steering Committee, 12 June 1940, PPLC 10-J; Pease, “President’s Report,” 18 June 1940, PPLC 39-E, and “Annual Report of the President,” 26 June 1940, PPLC 10-K; “Plan of Publicity,” 24 June 1940, PPLC 24-B; “Mrs. Darrach’s Report,” and CBCL Minutes, 26 June 1940, PPLC 10-J; Hartford Courant, 27 June 1940, p. 22; Hartford Times, 27 June 1940; Waterbury Republican, 28 June 1940, p. 21; Eleanor Searle, Executive Committee Minutes, 9 July 1940, PPLC 10-K; Darrach to Winslow, 14 July 1940, Winslow Box 96. Also see Lucy Smith, “Minutes,” and Standish, “Annual Medical Report,” Hartford MHC, 18 June 1940, PPLC 39-E; Standish, “Hartford Clinic Annual Report,” 26 June 1940, PPLC 10-K; Gilbert Colgate, “Minutes,” BCFA Executive Committee, 2 July 1940, Winslow Box 95; Upson to Franklin, 3 and 5 July 1940, PPLC 2-L and 2-C. On Robbins W. Barstow, see his Hartford Courant obituary, 19 September 1962, p. 4.

13. Darrach to Campbell, 15 July 1940, PPLM Box 5; [Franklin], “Interview with Governor Baldwin,” 16 July 1940, PPLC 2-M. On Baldwin’s significance, see Roth, Connecticut, p. 194; Johnson, Raymond E. Baldwin, pp. 64–71; and especially John W. Jeffries, Testing the Roosevelt Coalition: Connecticut Society and Politics in the Era of World War II (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1979), pp. 23–45, 301.

14. Franklin to A. K. Holding, 25 July 1940, PPLC 2-O; Eleanor Searle, Executive Committee Minutes, 6 August 1940, PPFA Box 38; Hartford Courant, 9 August 1940, p. 12; Searle to Rose, 8 August 1940, Morris to Rose, 13 August 1940, Pilpel to Huse, Rose to McWilliams, and Harold J. Seymour to Rose, 19 August 1940, Huse to Rose, 20 August 1940, McWilliams to Rose (II), 24 August 1940, Huse to Rose, 28 August 1940, Rose to Franklin, 12 September 1940, McWilliams to Pilpel, 16 September 1940, Pilpel to McWilliams, 18 September 1940, McWilliams to Rose, 30 September 1940, and Rose to Franklin, 14 October 1940, all PPFA Box 38; Holding, “Interview with Mrs. Sara Crawford,” 15 August 1940, PPLC 2-L; “Report of Meeting with Tolland County Leaders,” 20 August 1940, PPLC 50-A; Franklin, “Interview with Judge Kenneth Wynne,” 29 August 1940, PPLC 8-H; Janney to Franklin, 8 October 1940, PPLC 2-M; Volunteers Newsletter Vol. 1, #1, 4 September 1940, and #2, 22 October 1940, PPLC 8-E; Creadick to Dr. Grannis, 13 September 1940, PPLC 2-O; Lucy Smith, Minutes, Hartford MHC, 13 September and 15 October 1940, PPLC 39-F; Eleanor Searle, Executive Committee Minutes, 25 September, 8 October and 28 October 1940, PPLC 8-B; Loraine Campbell to Rose, 10 October 1940, and Pease to Campbell, n.d. [c.17 October 1940], PPLM Box 5; Hartford Board to state Executive Committee, n.d., PPLC 3-F; Lucy Smith to state Executive Committee, 15 October 1940, PPLC 8-B; Morgan Brainard to Darrach, 15 October 1940, Winslow Box 96; Robbins, “Meeting of Committee on Affiliated Organizations,” 21 October 1940, PPLC 2-A; Franklin to Mary P. Milmine, 25 October 1940, PPLC 2-E; C.-E. A. Winslow to Brainard, 30 October 1940, Brainard to Winslow, 2 November 1940, Winslow to Brainard, and to Darrach, 4 November 1940, Winslow Box 96.

15. Upson to Franklin, 28 October 1940, PPLC 2-M; Commonwealth v. Corbett, 307 Mass. 7, 29 N.E.2d 151 (17 September 1940); Pilpel, “The Social and Legal Status of Contraception,” North Carolina Law Review 22 (February 1944): 212–225, at 223; “Judicial Regulation of Birth Control Under Obscenity Laws,” Yale Law Journal 50 (February 1941): 682–689, at 686; Human Fertility 6 (February 1941): 27–28. Also see Commonwealth v. Werlinsky, 307 Mass. 608, 29 N.E.2d 150 (18 September 1940); Pilpel to Loraine Campbell, 18 September 1940, PPLM Box 14; Upson to Robert H. Harry, 11 January 1941, Upson Papers; Ernst and Pickett, Birth Control in the Courts, pp. 43–45; Commonwealth v. Goldberg, 316 Mass. 563, 55 N.E.2d 951 (27 June 1944); and the Massachusetts Mothers’ Health Council monthly newsletter, The Family Guardian, which commenced publication in July/August 1939, as well as Campbell to Hoar, 24 November 1939, and Hoar to Campbell, 27 November 1939, PPLM Boxes 6 and 11. See as well U.S. v. H. L. Blake Co., 189 F. Supp. 903 (30 December 1960).

16. Human Fertility 5 (October 1940): 158–159, (December 1940): 190–191, 6 (February 1941): 27–28; Eugene L. Belisle, “Church Control versus Birth Control,” The Nation 155 (28 November 1942): 568–570; Loraine Campbell Interviews with Reed and with Stuart; L. Foster Wood, “The Free Speech Issue in Holyoke” Information Service 20 (22 March 1941): 1–4 [Federal Council of Churches; Ernst Box 894]; and Kenneth W. Underwood, Protestant and Catholic: Religious and Social Interaction in an Industrial Community (Boston: Beacon Press, 1957), pp. 3–38, which speaks of Holyoke as “Paper City” and uses pseudonyms for all individual names other than Sanger’s. Among the speakers at one Massachusetts birth control conference in Springfield was Roger B. Nelson; see Nelson to Loraine Campbell, 7 November 1940, PPLM Box 81, and Springfield Evening Union, 14 November 1940, pp. 1, 2 and Springfield Union, 15 November 1940.

17. Paul Franklin to Harold Seymour, “Confidential,” 8–13 November 1940, PPLC 2-Q; Eleanor Searle, Executive Committee Minutes, 12 and 26 November and 19 and 27 December 1940, PPLC 8-B and C; A. K. Holding to Franklin, 15 November 1940, Upson, “Memorandum for Mr. Hanna …” (II) 20 and 25 November 1940, PPLC 2-Q; Franklin, “Things to Be Done,” 21 November 1940, PPLC 2-R; Mabel Robbins to Holding, n.d., Holding to Upson, 25 November 1940, PPLM 2-M; Garrow conversations with Bice Clemow; Franklin to Clemow, 4 December 1940, PPLC 8-J; Barstow to McWilliams, 5 December 1940, and Colgate to Barstow, 13 December 1940, PPFA Box 38; Upson memo, 11 December 1940, PPLC 2-M; Clemow to Darrach, 12 December 1940, PPLC 3-B; Clemow, “Lawyers’ Meeting,” 14 December 1940, PPLC 8-F; Clemow to Horace Taft, 17 December 1940, PPLC 8-J; [Upson], “Draft of Proposed Sub-Committee Report,” n.d. [c.20 December 1940], PPLC 8-E; Mary Lasker, “Minutes,” BCFA Executive Committee, 27 December 1940, Winslow Box 95; Clemow to Sub-Committee, “A Doctor for a Test Case,” 31 December 1940, PPLC 3-B; “Status of Plans as of January 1, 1941,” 8pp., PPLC 8-F; Winslow to Alice Cowgill, 7 January 1941, and to Darrach, 9 January 1941, Winslow Box 96; Robbins, Minutes, Hartford MHC, 8 January 1941, PPLC 39-F; Searle to Clemow, 10 January 1941, PPLC 3-B. On Carroll C. Hincks, who in 1953 ascended to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals (and who, in the 1910s, had practiced law in Waterbury with subsequent Connecticut State Supreme Court Justice Arthur Ells), see New Haven Register, 28 March 1948, pp. Magazine 1–2, 15 March 1959, 24 May 1959, p. 22, and his Register obituary, 30 September 1964.

18. Eleanor Searle, Board Minutes, 13 and 27 January 1941, PPLC 8-C; Bridgeport Telegram, 14 January 1941; Hartford Courant, 14 January 1941, p. 4, 15 January 1941, p. 6; Clemow to Darrach, 18 January 1941, PPLC 3-B; Upson to Darrach, 21 January 1941, PPLC 2-M; Darrach to Wiggin, 21 January 1941, Stoddard to Leonard D. Adkins, 21 January 1941, Adkins to Stoddard, 23 January 1941, Wiggin to Darrach, 24 January 1941, PPLC 3-B; Clemow to Darrach, 31 January 1941, PPLC 2-M. Also see Robbins to Upson, 13 January 1943, PPLC 3-I. On F. H. Wiggin, in addition to Garrow conversations with John Q. Tilson, Jr., and Catherine J. Tilson, see Franklin, “Interview with Mr. Frederick H. Wiggin,” 24 May 1940, PPLC 8-H, and Wiggin’s obituaries in the New Haven Register and New Haven Journal-Courier, 23 May 1963, p. 1.

19. Birth Control News Vol. 1, #1 (February 1941); Journal of the House, p. 467 (4 February 1941); Journal of the Senate, p. 604 (11 February 1941); “Minutes,” Sponsorship Committee, 7 February 1941, PPLC 2-A; Eleanor Searle, Executive Committee Minutes, 17 February 1941, PPLC 8-C; Penelope Huse to Mrs. Damon, 20 February 1941, Rose Box 32; Hartford Times, 7 January 1941; Hartford Courant, 8 January 1941, p. 20, 7 February 1941, p. 10, 9 February 1941, p. 1, 10 February 1941, 14 February 1941, p. 2, 15 February 1941, p. 4, 18 February 1941, p. 6, 19 February 1941, p. 6, 25 February 1941, p. 6, 26 February 1941, p. 6. Guy E. Shipler, Jr., “Catholics & Birth Control: How the Battle Goes in Connecticut,” Churchman, 1 May 1941, pp. 14–15, part two of a four-part series, contains some errors. On the Barrett-McTernan exchange, later joined by Horace Taft, see the Waterbury American, 19 November 1940, 25 November 1940, p. 8, 29 November 1940, 13 December 1940, 19 December 1940, and 7 January 1941; also see Mrs. Anson Stocking, “Report on Birth Control Activities for Waterbury,” n.d. [c.February 1941], PPLC 1-L, who observed that “These letters have done much to interest persons in the subject of birth control” and added that “It is astonishing the number of intelligent people who are under the impression that Birth Control Clinics mean legalized abortion.” See as well Hartford Courant, 12 December 1940, p. 1, and 17 December 1940, p. 13.

20. Hartford Courant, 28 February 1941, pp. 1, 5, 1 March 1941, p. 12, 3 March 1941, pp. 1, 2, 4 March 1941, pp. 7, 9, 7 March 1941, pp. 6, 15, 10 March 1941, p. 4, 12 March 1941, p. 13, 13 March 1941, p. 8, 23 March 1941, p. 14; Waterbury Republican, 21 March 1941, 1 April 1941; Hartford Times, 24 March 1941; Clemow to Penelope Huse, 11 March 1941, PPFA Box 38.

21. Clemow to Files, 1 February 1941, Wiggin to Darrach, 3 February 1941, PPLC 3-B; “Statement of Wilder Tileston, M.D.” 30 June 1941, Tileston Record, Connecticut Supreme Court; Wiggin to Clemow, 19 March 1941, Clemow to Wiggin, 21 March 1941, PPLC 3-B; Wiggin, “Complaint and Subpoena,” 20 March 1941, Tileston Record and PPLC 3-F. Also see Harriet Pollack, “An Uncommonly Silly Law: The Connecticut Birth Control Cases in the U.S. Supreme Court” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1967), pp. 88–90. On Dr. Tileston, in addition to a Garrow conversation with his son Peter, see his obituary notices in the New Haven Register, 7 May 1969, p. 23, and Connecticut Medicine 33 (June 1969): 419–420. On Abraham S. Ullman, see his obituaries in the 21 August 1974 New Haven Journal-Courier and the 22 August 1974 New Haven Register, and the 27 November 1939 Register on his appointment, after eleven years as the assistant state’s attorney.

22. New Haven Register, 25 March 1941, 6 April 1941, p. 3; Hartford Times, 25 March 1941, 1 April 1941, 10 April 1941, p. 2, 11 April 1941, p. 21; Hartford Courant, 26 March 1941, p. 22, 11 April 1941, pp. 1, 4, 6; New York Herald Tribune, 25 and 26 March 1941; Greenwich Press, 27 March 1941; Birth Control News Vol. 1, #2 (March 1941) and #3 (April 1941); Transcript of Public Health and Safety Committee Hearing, 10 April 1941, 51pp., Connecticut State Library; [Penelope Huse and Morris Lewis], “Report on Hearing … April 10, 1941,” 16 April 1941, 7pp., and Morris Lewis to Mrs. Damon, “Massachusetts & Connecticut Hearings,” 22 April 1941, PPFA Box 38; Bridgeport Herald, 13 April 1941, p. 8.

23. Catholic Transcript, 17 April 1941, p. 4; Mabel Robbins, Executive Committee Minutes, 21 April 1941, PPLC 8-C; Hartford Times, 25 April 1941, p. 28; Birth Control News Vol. 1, #4 (May 1941); Pilpel to Clemow, 8 May 1941, PPLC 3-C; Darrach to Nan Rockefeller, 15 April 1941, Rockefeller Papers.

24. Hartford Courant, 14 May 1941, pp. 1, 4, 20 May 1941, pp. 1, 2, 21 May 1941, p. 1, 11, 28 May 1941, p. 2; Hartford Times, 14 May 1941, p. 27, 21 May 1941, 22 May 1941, p. 30, 27 May 1941, pp. 1, 2, 28 May 1941; Journal of the House, pp. 1498, 1568–1579, 1809 (14 May, 20 May, 28 May 1941); Journal of the Senate, pp. 1653, 1748–1750 (21 and 27 May 1941); 1941 Connecticut General Assembly Records (RG 2), Box 201; Waterbury Republican, 21 May 1941, pp. 1, 2, 28 May 1941, p. 3; Waterbury American, 22 May 1941, p. 1; Bice Clemow, “An Analysis of the Vote in the House,” 24 May 1941, and “An Analysis of the Vote in the Senate,” 2 June 1941, PPLC 2-Q; Human Fertility 6 (June 1941): 95–96. On the 1941 session in general, see Van Dusen, Connecticut, pp. 370–371.

25. Human Fertility 6 (February 1941): 28, (June 1941): 94–95; John M. Hall to Loraine Campbell, 1 May 1941, PPLM Box 5; Opinion of the Justices, 309 Mass. 555 (16 May 1941); Jonathan Daniels, “Birth Control and Democracy,” The Nation 153 (1 November 1941): 429; Eugene L. Belisle, “Birth Control in Massachusetts,” The New Republic 105 (8 December 1941): 759–760; Stephen D. Howard, “The Birth Control Law Conflict in Massachusetts” (unpublished B.A. thesis, Harvard University, 1959), pp. 43–55. The votes against the measure were 133 to 77 in the house and 18 to 16 in the state senate.

26. Eleanor Searle, Board Minutes (II), 12 June 1941, PPLC 8-C; Clemow to Executive Committee Members, 12 June 1941, PPLC 10-L; Morris Lewis to Clemow, 6 June 1941, Clemow to Lewis, 9 June 1941, and Lewis to Clemow, 10 June 1941, PPFA Box 38; Darrach to Barstow, 28 June 1941, and Barstow to Darrach, 1 July 1941, PPLC 8-A; Mabel Robbins to Clarence Gamble, 15 July 1941, Gamble 6–119; Robbins, “Minutes,” 13 August and 15 September 1941, Peggy Newburger, Executive Committee Minutes, 23 September 1941, PPLC 10-L; Janet S. Williams, “Report of Executive Vice-President,” 28 May 1942, PPLC 10-M; Hartford Times, 16 October 1941; Hartford Courant, 17 October 1941, p. 26, 20 October 1941, p. 2; Newsweek, 20 October 1941, pp. 65–66; Time, 27 October 1941, p. 74; The Family Guardian #22 (November-December 1941): 3–4; Clemow to Barstow, 22 November 1941, PPLC 3-B.

27. Mabel Robbins, Executive Committee Minutes, 25 November 1941, PPLC 10-L; Wiggin to Barstow, 2 December 1941, PPLC 3-B; Tileston Record, pp. 12–17, 24–37, and 40–52; Hartford Courant, 4 December 1941, p. 5; Human Fertility 6 (December 1941): 191–192; Wiggin to Darrach, 12 December 1941, PPLC 3-C; Janet S. Williams, “Annual Report,” 22 December 1941, PPLC 10-L; Peggy Newburger, Board Minutes, 27 January 1941, PPLC 10-M; Wiggin and Tilson, “Brief for the Plaintiff,” Wilder Tileston v. Abraham S. Ullman et al., Connecticut Supreme Court, February Term 1942, #2164, 29 January 1942; Ullman, Philip R. Pastore, and Fred Trotta, “Brief of the Defendants,” Tileston v. Ullman, #2164, A-172 463–470. Also see Milton C. Winternitz and Henry Bunting, “The Law and Planned Parenthood,” Connecticut State Medical Journal 6 (February 1942): 102, and Human Fertility 7 (December 1942): 175.

28. Wiggin to Janet Williams, 29 January 1942, Williams to Wiggin, 2 and 7 February 1942, Robbins to Wiggin, 4 February 1942, Wiggin to Williams, 6 February 1942, PPLC 3-B; Florence Darrach [by Robbins], “Annual Report,” 28 January 1943, PPLC 10-N.

29. Reed, The Birth Control Movement, p. 136; Tileston v. Ullman, 129 Conn. 84, 88, 26 A.2d 582; Hartford Courant, 3 June 1942, p. 1, 4 June 1942, p. 13; Hartford Times, 3 June 1942, p. 1; New York Post, 3 June 1942. On Arthur F. Ells, see Allyn Brown’s profile of him at 151 Conn. 747, and his Courant obituary, 9 December 1963, p. 27. Commentaries on Tileston include Human Fertility 7 (June 1942): 89–91; Ave Maria, 20 June 1942, pp. 770–771; Journal of the American Medical Association 120 (19 December 1942): 1338; and Jerome A. Scoler, Boston University Law Review 23 (January 1943): 115–118. In line with the Connecticut Supreme Court’s opinion, Superior Court Judge Frank P. McEvoy entered a formal judgment in the case on June 26; Tileston Case File, #60475, New Haven County Superior Court. Fritz Wiggin received a total fee of $3,000 for his work on the case; Wiggin and Dana Statement, 5 June 1942, PPLC 3-D.

30. Rose to Janet Williams, 9 June 1942, Peggy Newburger, Executive Committee Minutes, 10 June 1942, PPLC 10-M; Penelope Huse to Rose, 12 June 1942, PPFA Box 38; Darrach to Upson, 13 June 1942, Upson Papers; Robbins to Eugene Belisle, 15 June 1942, PPLM Box 106; “Report on Conference Held in New Haven,” 26 June 1942, PPFA Box 38; Robbins, Minutes, 26 June 1942, Darrach to Board Members, 29 June and 27 July 1942, PPLC 10-M; Darrach to Pilpel, 4 July 1942, Darrach to Claude Pierce, 5 August 1942, Ernst Box 363; Pilpel to Upson, 14 August 1942, Pilpel to Wiggin, 17 August 1942, Upson Papers; Ernst and Pilpel, “Statement of Jurisdiction and Opinions,” Wilder Tileston v. Abraham S. Ullman et al., 25 August 1942, PPLC 3-F; Pilpel to Robbins, 28 August 1942, Ernst to Darrach, 31 August 1942, PPLC 3-D; Ernst to Rose, 31 August 1942, Ernst to Penelope Huse, 1 September 1942, PPFA Box 39; Roger Baldwin to Arthur Hayes, 3 September 1942, Hayes to Baldwin, 9 September 1942, Clifford Forster to Catherine J. Tilson, 18 September 1942, Tilson to Forster, 21 September 1942, ACLU Box 2522; ACLU Board Minutes, 14 September 1942, Box 2356; Pilpel to Robbins, 3 September 1942, Pilpel to Darrach, 11 September 1942, PPLC 3-D; Robbins to Upson, 11 September 1942, Pilpel to Upson, 18 September 1942, Upson Papers; Hartford Times, 17 September 1942, 1 October 1942; Ullman, Pastore, and Arthur T. Gorman, “Statement Against Jurisdiction and Motion to Dismiss or Affirm,” Tileston v. Ullman, 20 September 1942, PPLC 3-F; Peggy Newburger, PPLC Executive Committee Minutes, 22 September 1942, Upson Papers; Rose to Ernst et al., 25 September 1942, PPLC 3-D and PPFA Box 38; Pilpel to Upson, and Blake Cabot to Upson, 28 September 1942, Upson Papers; William Darrach et al. to “Dear Doctor,” 1 October 1942, and PPLC “1942 Fall Newsletter,” PPLC 3-F; Hartford Courant, 2 and 3 October 1942; Pilpel to Upson, 1 October 1942, Cabot to Upson, 5 October 1942, and Scribner to Upson, 7 October 1942, Upson Papers; Robbins to Cabot, 5 October 1942, Cabot to Robbins, 7 October 1942, Upson to Cabot, 13 October 1942, PPFA Box 38; Cabot to Upson, 13 October 1942, Scribner to Upson, 14 October 1942, Pilpel to Upson, 14 October 1942, Ullman to Upson, 15 October 1942, Pilpel to Upson, 19 October 1942, Cabot to Upson, 19 October 1942, Upson Papers; Upson to Cabot, 21 October 1942, PPFA Box 39; Ernst to Upson, 22 October 1942, Upson Papers; Upson to “Dear Doctors,” 24 October 1942, PPLC 3-F; Ernst, “Appellant’s Brief,” Tileston v. Ullman, U.S. Supreme Court, October Term 1942, #420, 24 October 1942; Lawrence L. Lewis and Upson, “Brief on Behalf of A. Nowell Creadick, M.D. and Others,” Tileston v. Ullman, 24 October 1942, Upson Papers; Scribner, “Brief on Behalf of 166 Physicians,” Tileston v. Ullman, 24 October 1942, PPLC 3-I; Hartford Courant, 25 October 1942, pp. 1, 2; Upson to Pilpel, 27 October 1942, Pilpel to Upson, 28 October 1942, Upson Papers.

31. See Eugene L. Belisle, “Church Control versus Birth Control,” The Nation 155 (28 November 1942): 568–570; Belisle, “The Cardinal Stoops to Conquer,” The New Republic, 30 November 1942, pp. 710–712; Howard, “The Birth Control Law Conflict in Massachusetts,” pp. 56–71; James M. O’Toole, “Prelates and Politicos: Catholics and Politics in Massachusetts, 1900–1970,” in Robert E. Sullivan and O’Toole, eds., Catholic Boston (Boston: Archdiocese of Boston, 1985), pp. 15–65, at 31–35; and O’Toole, Militant and Triumphant: William Henry O’Connell and the Catholic Church in Boston, 1859–1944 (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1992), pp. 135–36. Also see Compton v. State Ballot Law Commission, 311 Mass. 643 (29 May 1942); Human Fertility 7 (August 1942): 112–113 and 123, (December 1942): 191; Alvah W. Sulloway, Birth Control and Catholic Doctrine (Boston: Beacon Press, 1959), p. 203; and John H. Fenton, The Catholic Vote (New Orleans: Hauser Press, 1960), pp. 7–20.

32. Mabel Robbins to Eleanor Sachs, and Florence Darrach to “Dear Friend,” 16 November 1942, PPLC 3-D and 10-M; Jeffries, Testing the Roosevelt Coalition, pp. 130–131; Hartford Courant, 10 November 1942, p. 12; Upson to Pilpel, 13 November 1942, Upson Papers; “VC” [Vern Countryman], “Tileston v. Ullman,” n.d., Douglas Papers Box 78.

33. Pilpel to Upson, 16 and 20 November 1942, Upson Papers; Borchard to Pilpel, 24 November 1942, Pilpel to Borchard, 27 November 1942, Borchard to Pilpel, 30 November 1942, Borchard Box 106; Garrow conversation with Peter Tileston; Upson to Darrach, and to Creadick, 27 November 1942, Robbins to Upson, 30 November 1942, Upson Papers; Human Fertility 7 (December 1942): 188–190; Eleanor Sachs, Executive Committee Minutes, 1 December 1942, PPLC 10-M; Borchard to Pilpel, 3 December 1942, Pilpel to Borchard, 4 December 1942, Borchard to Pilpel, 5 December 1942, Borchard Box 106; “Report on Connecticut Situation,” 4 December 1942, PPFA Box 38; Upson to Darrach, 9 December 1942, Upson to Scribner, 14 December 1942, Scribner to Upson, 16 December 1942, Pilpel to Upson, 18 December 1942, Darrach to Upson, 18 December 1942, Upson Papers; Pilpel to Borchard, 18 December 1942, Borchard to Pilpel, 22 December 1942, Borchard Box 106; Upson to Pilpel, to Scribner, and to Darrach, 28 December 1942, Ernst to Upson, 29 December 1942, Scribner to Upson, 31 December 1942, Upson Papers; Pilpel to Clerk E. C. Cullinan, 31 December 1942, Tileston v. Ullman Case File, National Archives (RG 267) Box 3166; Upson to Scribner, 2 January 1943, Scribner to Upson, 4 January 1943, Darrach to Upson, n.d. [3 January 1943], Upson to Darrach, 4 January 1943, Upson to Ernst, and to Charles Cropsey, 5 January 1943, Darrach to Upson, 6 January 1943, Upson Papers; Penelope Huse to Rose, 6 January 1943, PPFA Box 39; Pilpel to Borchard, 6 January 1943, Borchard to Pilpel, 7 January 1943, Borchard Box 106; Ernst and Borchard, “Appellant’s Reply Brief,” Tileston v. Ullman, 7 January 1943; Lewis and Upson, “Brief on Behalf of A. Nowell Creadick, M.D. and Others,” Tileston v. Ullman, 7 January 1943; Scribner, “Brief on Behalf of 166 Physicians,” Tileston v. Ullman, 7 January 1943; Darrach to Robbins, 11 January 1943, and Robbins to Darrach, 12 January 1943, PPLC 3-D. Also see Pollack, “An Uncommonly Silly Law,” pp. 95–97. Somewhat stunningly, Borchard suggested to Ernst (18 December 1942, Borchard Box 106) that in light of their uncertainty as to whether the declaratory judgment form of the case might be troubling the Justices, “Would it be out of the question for me to write Mr. Douglas or the Chief Justice a personal letter and ask which of these points bothered them, saying that if it were the declaratory judgment point I would endeavor to be present in the Court room and argue the question.” Douglas and Stone were the two justices he knew best, Borchard said, “but I do not know whether it would be improper practice to make such a personal inquiry.” As of the fall of 1942, Borchard had been teaching at Yale Law School for twenty-five years. See Laura Kalman, Legal Realism at Yale, 1927–1960 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1986), pp. 101, 140.

34. Charles E. Scribner, “The Argument of Tileston v. Ullman in the United States Supreme Court,” 15 January 1943, 9pp., PPFA Box 39; Ernst, The Best Is Yet … (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1945), p. 254; Hartford Courant, 14 January 1943, p. 9, 15 January 1943, p. 2, 28 January 1943; New York Herald Tribune, 15 January 1943. On William L. Beers, a subsequent Attorney General of Connecticut who had been named a special assistant to Ullman on November 25 for the purpose of assisting with Tileston, see the New Haven Register, 28 July 1953, and his Register obituary, 14 January 1955. Beers received $1,200 for his help, and Ullman was paid $6,000 in addition to his regular annual salary of $6,240 for his work on the case. New Haven Journal-Courier, 3 April 1943. Prior to the oral argument Upson was formally admitted to the Bar of the Supreme Court; Ullman and Beer were his official sponsors.

35. Upson to Creadick, and to Darrach, 15 January 1943, Upson to Ullman, and to Beers, 16 January 1943, Upson Papers; Ernst to Loraine Campbell, 21 January 1943, PPLM Box 84; Robbins, “Minutes,” 16 January 1943, and Board Minutes, 19 January 1943, PPLC 10-N; Borchard to Ernst, 15 January 1943, Ernst to Stone, 18 January 1943, Borchard Box 106. Borchard’s response to the oral argument experience was considerably more peevish than Ernst’s and Upson’s. If the Justices “had read the record and the briefs and known the case,” he complained to a friend, “they would not have asked so many irrelevant and snap judgment questions, questions which diverted the argument from its main course to collateral notions that spontaneously occurred to the Judges from the profundity of their assumed knowledge.” Most distressing, Borchard went on, was the Justices’ behavior toward Ernst: “Instead of deferring in slight degree to his long experience, they lit into him as if he were a young cub and they magisterial Socrates.” Borchard to Henry S. Fraser, 29 January 1943, Borchard Box 106.

36. William O. Douglas Conference Notes, Tileston v. Ullman, No. 420, 16 January 1943, Douglas Box 78; Tileston File, Stone Papers, Box 69; Tileston v. Ullman, 318 U.S. 44, 46; New York Times, 2 February 1943, p. 21; New York Herald Tribune, 2 February 1943; New York Post, 2 February 1943.

Stone’s modest file on Tileston includes brief written endorsements of his opinion from six of his seven colleagues: Frank Murphy, Robert H. Jackson, Stanley Reed, Owen Roberts, Felix Frankfurter (“This suits me fine”) and Hugo L. Black: “I agree although I preferred deciding the case on its merits. Since my views are in the minority on this point, I do not care to press them.” William O. Douglas also concurred; the Court that heard Tileston had one vacancy, as Wiley B. Rutledge had not yet been nominated to fill the seat vacated by James F. Byrnes.

Notes on Tileston include Human Fertility 8 (March 1943): 30–31; Charles E. Carpenter, Southern California Law Review 16 (March 1943): 220–228; and H. Peyton Wilmot, St. John’s Law Review 17 (April 1943): 122–123. Also see Charles E. Scribner, “Memorandum re Proposed Attack …” 16 February 1944, PPFA Box 38, Dudley D. Miles, “The Constitutionality of Anti-Birth Control Legislation,” Wyoming Law Journal 7 (Spring 1953): 138–142, and Borchard, “Challenging ‘Penal’ Statutes by Declaratory Action,” Yale Law Journal 52 (June 1943): 445–493, at 454 and 464–465, where he continued to insist that “the injury is done … by the enactment of the damaging statute or regulation, long before or even quite without any ‘threat’ of enforcement by an official.” Borchard’s response to the decision, however, was about as intemperate as his reaction to the oral argument. Stone, he told Ernst, “decided the case for the Court and decided it practically before the argument began, for the opinion follows almost precisely the points he raised at the opening of the case.” Borchard was willing to concede that “the complaint was not artistically drawn,” but “Only a person entrenched in his prejudice could maintain that it was not a controversy.” “It seems to me,” Borchard concluded, “that a new suit with perhaps one good woman is the best procedure available.” Borchard to Ernst, 4 February 1943, Borchard Box 106.

37. Hartford Courant, 2 February 1943, p. 3; Bice Clemow Interview with Garrow; Upson to Ernst, 2 February 1943, and “Memo for Mr. Berkman,” 3 February 1943, Upson Papers; Ernst to John Q. Tilson, Jr., 3 February 1943, Ernst to Florence Darrach, 4 February 1943, PPLC 3-D; Borchard to Ernst, 4 February 1943, Ernst to Borchard, 10 February 1943, Borchard Box 106; Hartford Times, 6 February 1943; Ernst to Upson, 10 February 1943, Upson to Ernst, 11 and 12 February and 9 March 1943, Upson Papers.

38. Ernst to Rose, 5 March 1943, PPLC 3-D; Hartford Courant, 2 February 1943, 12 February 1943, pp. 1, 6; Journal of the House, p. 194 (20 January); Journal of the Senate, p. 209 (21 January); Robbins, Legislative Committee Minutes, 17 February 1943, PPLC 10-N; Winslow to Darrach, 19 February 1943, Winslow Box 96; “Report of the Meeting,” 15 March 1943, PPLM Box 84; Virginia Wake, Board Minutes, 16 March 1943, PPLC 10-N; Upson to Darrach, “Memorandum,” 19 March 1943, [Robbins] to Eleanor Sachs, 19 March 1943, PPLC 3-K.

39. Transcript of Public Health and Safety Committee Hearing, 31 March 1943, 38pp., PPLC 3-L; Hartford Times, 31 March 1943, 1 April 1943, 14 April 1943, 21 April 1943; Hartford Courant, 1 April 1943, p. 5, 8 April 1943, p. 1, 9 April 1943, p. 1, 15 April 1943, pp. 1, 7, 21 April 1943, 22 April 1943, p. 1; Waterbury Democrat, 1 April 1943, p. 4; Bridgeport Herald, 4 April 1943; Florence Darrach to “Dear Legislator,” 31 March 1943, PPLC 3-L; Robbins to Upson, 2 April 1943, PPLC 3-K, Journal of the House, pp. 1299, 1339–1346, 1480 (9, 14, 27 April); Waterbury Republican, 10 April 1943; Upson to Joseph R. Neill, 10 and 22 April 1943, Lillian Owen to Mabel Robbins, 13 April 1943, PPLC 3-K and L; Journal of the Senate, pp. 1243 and 1313–1315 (15 and 21 April); Upson to Darrach, 22 April 1943, PPLC 3-L; Pilpel to Darrach, 23 April 1943, PPLC 3-D; Janson to Upson, 23 April 1943, Joseph R. Neill to Upson, 28 April 1943, Upson to Neill, 29 April 1943, PPLC 3-K; Virginia Wake, Board Minutes, 27 April 1943, PPLC 10-N. On the 1943 session in general, see Van Dusen, Connecticut, pp. 371–372. The number of senate seats had been increased from thirty-five to thirty-six between the 1940 and 1942 elections.

40. Rose to Darrach, 18 May 1943, PPLC 10-O; Upson to Darrach, 27 May 1943, PPLC 3-L; Upson to Rose, 27 May 1943, PPFA Box 38; Virginia Wake, Executive Committee and Board Minutes, 1 June 1943, PPLC 10-O; Alice Klein to Rose, 9 June 1943, Ernst to Upson, 15 June 1943, Upson to Ernst, 16 June 1943, Rose to Upson, 17 June 1943, Upson to Rose, 22 June 1943, Upson to Janney, 24 June 1943, PPFA Box 38; “Minutes of the Meeting,” 29 June 1943, PPLM Box 84; Janney to Board Members, 6 July 1943, PPLC 10-O; Alice Klein to Elizabeth Borden, 20 July 1943, PPLM Box 84; Edna McKinnon, “Legal Conferences,” 27 August-1 September 1943, PPFA Box 40 and PPLM Box 84. A clear pattern of dramatic summertime slumps in activity occurred in both Connecticut and Massachusetts from the 1920s through the 1940s, and was noted by observers at the time. As Francis Vreeland quoted one leading activist in 1929, “‘Reform is a winter pastime for the clubwoman and everything fluctuates with her.’” “The Process of Reform,” p. 359.

41. McKinnon, “Report of Exploratory Trip in Massachusetts,” 7 September 1943, McKinnon to Elizabeth Borden, 7 September 1943, Rose to Frederick M. Myers and to Joseph T. Bartlett, 10 September 1943, Borden to Rose, 17 September 1943, PPLM Box 84; McKinnon, “Report of Conference with Mr. Laurence Janney …” and “Report of Meeting Regarding Test Case,” 9 September 1943, McKinnon to Robbins, 9 September 1943, PPFA Box 38; McKinnon, “Report of Exploratory Trip in Connecticut” and “Report of Meeting With a Sub-Committee,” 16 September 1943, PPLC 3-N; McKinnon, “Report of Conference with Mrs. Darrach,” 22 September 1943, Rose to Borden, 22 September 1943, PPLM Box 84; McKinnon to Buist Anderson, 22 September 1943, Chauncey B. Garver to Rose, 24 September 1943, Morris Hadley to Rose, 27 September 1943, Anderson to McKinnon, 29 September 1943, PPFA Box 38; Ernst to Albert Lasker, 19 October 1943, Sanger-LC Box 180; Borden to Rose, 22 October 1943, PPLM Box 84; Robbins, “Report,” and Barbara Davenport, Board and Executive Committee Minutes, 26 October 1943, PPLC 10-O; Janney to Borden, 28 October 1943, PPLM Box 106; Borden to Carolyn Ahern, 28 October and 14 December 1943, Rose to Borden, 15 November 1943, Borden to Rose, 14 December 1943, PPLM Box 84; Clemow, Legal Advisory Committee Minutes, 20 November 1943, PPLC 3-N; Virginia Wake, Executive Committee Minutes, 18 January 1944, Janney, “Annual Narrative Report,” January 1944, PPLC 10-P; “The Fortune Survey, Fortune 28 (August 1943): 24 and 30; Schmiedler, “Birth Control: A Catholic View,” Reader’s Digest, October 1943, pp. 115–117. Also see American Mercury 58 (February 1944): 157–164, (April 1944): 504–506.

Father Schmiedler’s analysis of course prefigured by many years a very similar and now-famous thread metaphor. See Transcript of Oral Argument, Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, U.S. Supreme Court, October Term 1988, #88–605, pp. 11 and 15. Charles Fried, on behalf of the appellants, explained that with regard to Roe v. Wade, “We are asking the Court to pull this one thread.” Frank Susman, attorney for appellees, responded that “It has always been my personal experience that, when I pull a thread, my sleeve falls off.”

42. Elizabeth Borden to Rose, 2 February 1944, PPLM Box 84; Rose to Borden and Janney, 9 February 1944, PPLC 10-P; Charles Scribner to Ernst, 15 February 1944, and enclosed memorandum, Ernst Box 267 and PPFA Box 38; Virginia Wake, Board and Executive Committee Minutes, 14 March 1944, PPLC 10-P; McKinnon, “Report of Trip to Connecticut,” 15 March 1944, PPFA Box 38; McKinnon, “Report of Conference with Mr. Ernst …” 16 March 1944, PPLM Box 84; Pilpel, “Connecticut Birth Control,” 16 March 1944, Ernst Box 267; Rose to Borden, 16 March 1944, PPLM Box 84; McKinnon, “Production Schedule …” 17 March 1944, PPLM Box 84; McKinnon, “Report of Conference with Dr. Josephine Evarts,” 20 March 1944, PPLM Box 106 and PPFA Box 38; McKinnon to Buist Anderson, 20 March 1944, McKinnon to Rose and Mrs. Trent, 24 March 1944, PPFA Box 38; McKinnon to Carolyn Ahern, 24 March 1944, PPLM Box 84; Rose, “Connecticut Legal Case,” 30 March 1944, PPFA Box 38; McKinnon, “Connecticut Report No. 2,” 3 April 1944, PPLC 10-P; Pilpel, “Re: Planned Parenthood Federation,” 5 April 1944, Ernst Box 894; Anderson to Scribner, 6 April 1944, and Janney to McKinnon, [9] April 1944, PPFA Box 38; McKinnon, “Connecticut Report No. 3,” 14 April 1944, PPLC 10-P; Hadleigh Howd to Barbara Davenport, 15 April 1944, McKinnon to Rose, 17 April 1944, and McKinnon, “Conference with Mrs. Pilpel,” 19 April 1944, PPFA Box 38; Ernst to McKinnon, 11 May 1944, Ernst Box 894. On Dr. Evarts, who died in 1983, see Eunice Trowbridge and April Radbill, Dr. Josephine Evarts: A Tribute (n.p.: n.p., 1981)[Smith College Library], and Hartford Courant, 3 April 1986, pp. E1, E14.

43. Virginia Wake, Executive Committee and Annual Meeting Minutes, 15 May 1944, PPLC 10-P; Scribner to McKinnon, 12 May 1944, McKinnon to Trent and Rose, 14 May 1944, PPFA Box 38; Stuart Rand to Morris Hadley, 16 May 1944, PPLM Box 84; McKinnon, “Next Steps in Connecticut,” 26 May 1944, Cunningham to Janney, 26 May 1944, PPFA Box 38; McKinnon, “Resume of Test Case Situation in Massachusetts,” 29 May 1944, Betty Borden, “Report of Meeting …” 30 June 1944, PPLM Box 84; Cunningham, “Director’s Report,” and Leslie Staples, Executive Committee Minutes, 12 September 1944, PPLC 10-P; [Cunningham], “Tentative Plan for Legislative Campaign,” 26 September 1944, PPLC 3-N; Rose to Ernst, 31 October 1944, Ernst Box 894; Ernst to Sanger, 12 September 1944, Sanger-LC Box 180. Sanger imperiously and unfairly told Ernst in reply that she thought Ernst himself was largely to blame for the birth control movement’s decreased militancy. “Can you take that on the chin? There is a lot more I have pent up for explosion.” Reminiscent of Sanger’s erratic 1940 assault on Sallie Pease, this attack was equally misdirected. Sanger to Ernst, 19 September 1944, Sanger-LC Box 180.

On Molly Cunningham and her hiring, see the Stamford Advocate, 5 April 1938; Edna McKinnon, “Conference with Mrs. Gerald Cunningham,” 21 March 1944, PPFA Box 40; Connecticut Parenthood No. 1, July 1944; her 21 May 1976 obituaries in the Hartford Courant (p. 4) and the Hartford Times (p. 5); and especially Charles F. J. Morse’s wonderful profile in the Courant, 17 February 1963, p. B3.

44. Jeffries, Testing the Roosevelt Coalition, p. 195; Wilbert Snow, Codline’s Child: The Autobiography of Wilbert Snow (Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1974), pp. 427–431; Cunningham to Elizabeth Borden, 14 November 1944, PPLM Box 106; Cunningham to McAuliffe, 13 November 1944, McAuliffe to Cunningham, 14 November 1944. McAuliffe died the following month, and early in 1945 was succeeded by Henry J. O’Brien. Also see Cornelius P. Trowbridge, “Catholicism Fights Birth Control,” The New Republic, 22 January 1945, pp. 106–109.

45. [Cunningham], “Conference in the office of Mr. Morris Ernst,” 15 November 1944, PPLC 3-N; Virginia Wake, Board Minutes, 21 November 1944, PPLC 10-R; Ernst to Evarts, 30 November 1944, Ernst Box 894; Connecticut Parenthood No. 2, December 1944; Janney to Ernst, 2 December 1944, Ernst to Janney, 8 December 1944, PPLC 3-N and 10-R; McKinnon, “Legal Situation …” 9 December 1944, PPLC 3-N and PPLM Box 84; Pilpel, “Connecticut Birth Control, “13 December 1944, Ernst Box 267; Amelia W. Fisk, “Report of Interview with Mr. Rand,” 21 December 1944, “Report on Interview with Drs. DeNormandie and Titus,” 28 December 1944, “Report of Telephone Interview with Mr. Rand,” 29 December 1944, PPLM Box 84; Cunningham to Ernst, 27 December 1944, Ernst to Cunningham, 3 January 1945, PPLC 3-N; Fisk to Ernst, 28 December 1944, Rand to Fisk, 2 January 1945, PPLM Box 84; McKinnon to Fisk, 4 January 1945, Borden to Ernst, 2 February 1945, PPLM Box 84; Ernst to Evarts, 25 January 1945, Ernst Box 267.

On Ernst, see the superb Life profile, by Yale law professor Fred Rodell: “Morris Ernst: New York’s Unlawyerlike Liberal Lawyer Is the Censor’s Enemy, the President’s Friend,” Life, 21 February 1944, pp. 97–98, 100–107; also see Marquis James, “Morris L. Ernst,” Scribner’s Magazine 104 (July 1938): 7–11, 57–58; “Greenbaum, Wolff & Ernst—A Brief History of the Firm,” 1955, and a 1960 Supplement, Ernst Papers Box 846; and Harrison E. Salisbury, “The Strange Correspondence of Morris Ernst and John Edgar Hoover, 1939–1964,” The Nation 239 (1 December 1984): 575–589. Ernst’s is a biography waiting to be written.

46. Virginia Wake, Board Minutes, 15 January and 21 February 1945, PPLC 10-R; Harriet Janney, “PPLC Narrative Report,” 23 January 1945, PPLC 11-A; Hartford Times, 25 January 1945, p. 4, 1 March 1945, p. 18; Hartford Courant, 26 January 1945, p. 5; Journal of the House, pp. 263–264 (30 January); Journal of the Senate, p. 257 (January 31); Ernst to Cunningham, 28 February 1945, PPLC 3-N and Ernst Box 267; Ernst to Scribner, 7 March 1945, Sanger-LC Box 180; Julie Howson, Board Minutes, 20 March 1945, PPLC 10-R; Ernst to Becket, 10 April 1945, Becket to Ernst, 24 April 1945, Pilpel, “Connecticut Birth Control,” 30 April 1945, Becket to Pilpel, 2 May 1945, Ernst Box 267. On the Roper poll, also see New York Herald Tribune, 26 June 1947; Hartford Courant, 1 July 1947, p. 10; and Human Fertility, June 1947, p. 51.

47. Transcript of Hearing, Public Health and Safety Committee, 1 May 1945, 29pp., PPLC 3-O and Connecticut State Library; Harriet Janney, “The Life and Death of House Bill 317,” Connecticut Parenthood’ No. 3, July 1945; Mary V. Z. Cunningham, “The Connecticut Hearing,” Human Fertility 10 (September 1945): 92–94; Hartford Courant, 2 May 1945; Hartford Times, 2 May 1945, 22 May 1945; Executive Committee Minutes, 15 May 1945, PPLC 10-R; Cunningham, “Annual Report of Director,” 29 May 1945, PPLC 11-A. On the 1945 session in general, see Van Dusen, Connecticut, pp. 378–379; also see Virginia L. Blood Interview with Joyce Pendery. Fifteen years later, following his election as a United States Senator, Thomas J. Dodd took a decidedly different stance than he had in 1945 (and 1947), telling PPFA’s Cass Canfield that “I believe that government should not legislate concerning so private and personal a matter as birth control practices. This is a matter of private conscience and religious conviction which should be approached through persuasion, rather than compulsion.” Dodd to Canfield, 12 October 1960, PPFA II-107. On Dodd’s subsequent scandal-ridden departure from the U.S. Senate, see James Boyd, Above the Law (New York: New American Library, 1968).

48. Leslie Staples, Annual Meeting Minutes, 29 May 1945, PPLC 11-A; Pilpel, “Connecticut Birth Control,” 15 June 1945, Becket to Ernst, 16 June 1945, Cunningham to Ernst, 6 July 1945, Ernst to Cunningham, 9 July 1945, Ernst Box 267; Irwin E. Friedman to Ernst, 21 July 1945, [Cunningham], “Record of Conversations with Ernst Office,” August to November, 1945, PPLC 3-N; Pilpel, Note to File, 14 August 1945, Pilpel to Becket, 17 August 1945, Cunningham to Pilpel, 4 September 1945, Pilpel to Ernst, 5 and 7 September 1945, Pilpel, “Connecticut Birth Control,” 14 September 1945, Ernst Box 267; Mabel Robbins to Warren Upson, 18 September 1945, PPLC 3-M; Ernst to Pilpel, 22 September 1945, Ernst Box 267; Pilpel, “Connecticut Birth Control,” 9 October 1945, Becket to Ernst, 10 October 1945, Pilpel, “Connecticut Birth Control,” 11 October 1945, Ernst to Becket, 17 October 1945, Pilpel, “Planned Parenthood” (II), 19 October 1945, Pilpel, “Connecticut Birth Control,” 22 October 1945, Ernst Box 267; Janet Williams, Board Minutes, 27 November 1945, PPLC 11-B; [Cunningham], “Report—Conference, Morris Ernst,” 30 November 1945, PPLC 3-N; Connecticut Parenthood No. 4, December 1945.

49. Cunningham, “Director’s Report,” 27 November 1945 and 27 March 1946, Virginia Wake, Board Minutes, 27 March 1946, PPLC 11-B and C; Cunningham, “State Director’s Report,” 28 May 1946, Janney, “President’s Report,” 28 May 1946, Virginia Wake, Annual Meeting Minutes, 28 May 1946, PPLC 11-D. Julie Howson, a 1907 graduate of Bryn Mawr, was sixty years old when she assumed the presidency. The two-month delay appears to have occurred because Howson was the (unsuccessful) Democratic nominee for a state house seat in Newtown in 1946, and she formally assumed the role in mid-November, soon after the election; Mrs. Barry Morgan served as acting president in the interim.

50. Mary P. Milmine, Medical Advisory Committee Minutes, 10 October 1946, PPLC 15-A; Leslie Staples, Board Minutes, 15 October and 19 November 1946, PPLC 11-D; Jeffries, Testing the Roosevelt Coalition, pp. 231, 239; Snow, Codline’s Child, pp. 442–446; Cunningham to Pilpel, 13 November 1946, PPLC 4-F; Cunningham, “Director’s Report,” 19 November 1946, PPLC 11-E; Milmine to Jane L. Brown, 22 November 1946, PPLC 4-B; Cunningham to Amelia Fisk, 2 January 1947, PPLM Box 106; Janney, “Annual Report for 1946,” 7 January 1947, PPLC 11-E; Hartford Courant, 21 January 1947. Regarding the long-pending Josephine Evarts possibility, Ernst told Molly Cunningham that “I am sorry that our client in Connecticut could not be pressed faster to start a suit,” and noted that Cam Becket had “found, as we did, a certain amount of reluctance on the part of the client to proceed.” Ernst to Cunningham, 18 November 1946, PPLC 4-F; also see Cunningham to Ernst, 20 November 1946, PPLC 4-B, and Becket to Julie Howson, 21 August 1947, PPLC 4-J, who instead explained the delay largely in terms of how overworked J. Howard Roberts had been, plus an eventual Roberts decision that the matter could not be handled by stipulation rather than a public trial. At that stage Roberts was nominated to a Superior Court judgeship.

51. Journal of the House, p. 297 (7 February); Journal of the Senate, p. 313 (11 February); 1947 Connecticut General Assembly Records (RG 2), Box 250; Hartford Courant, 6 February 1947, p. 2, 7 February 1947, p. 6; “Report from Mr. John Alsop,” n.d. [7 February 1947], [Cunningham], “Report of Conference with Harry B. Strong,” 18 February 1947, PPLC 4-A. On John Alsop, who subsequently remained an insurance executive and never became as well-known as his older brothers Joseph and Stewart, see the Courant, 8 September 1980, pp. 1, 32, and 20 May 1984, pp. A1, A14.

52. Lawrence E. Skelly to Joseph L. Hetzel, 6 March 1947, Sister Louise to Allen F. Delevett, 8 March 1947, ACLU 1947 CL-2; Sister Louise to Elwood K. Jones, 8 March 1947, PPLC 4-A; Leslie Staples, Board Minutes, 7 March 1947, PPLC 11-F; Hartford Courant, 9 March 1947, 11 March 1947, 12 March 1947; Transcript of Hearing on H.B. #953, Public Health and Safety Committee, 11 March 1947, 66pp., PPLC 4-F and Connecticut State Library; Waterbury Republican, 12 March 1947, p. 1; Hartford Times, 12 March 1947; New York Herald Tribune, 13 March 1947; Connecticut Parenthood No. 6, April 1947; Human Fertility, March 1947, pp. 28–29.

53. Hartford Courant, 19 March 1947, p. 12, 20 March 1947, p. 2, 21 March 1947, pp. 12, 16, 22 March 1947, 30 March 1947, 8 April 1947, pp. 1, 2; Hetzel to Lionel Raymond, 16 March 1947, Meeting Minutes, 17 March 1947, Delevett et al. to O’Brien, 25 March 1947, PPLC 4-A; John J. Hayes to Hetzel, 28 March 1947, Hetzel to Hayes, 29 March 1947, ACLU 1947 CL-2; PPLC, “Where We Stand Right Now,” 1 April and 9 April 1947, PPLC 4-C; Skelly to Hetzel, to Delevett, and to Oliver L. Stringfield, 2 April 1947, Delevett et al., “To the Members of the General Assembly,” and Stringfield to Skelly, 7 April 1947, ACLU 1947 CL-2; Waterbury Republican, 8 April 1947, pp. 1, 2; New York Times, 8 April 1947, p. 24; Hartford Times, 8 April 1947, p. 12. In early April a sixth doctor, Oliver L. Stringfield of Stamford, was added to the initial list of five.

54. New York Herald Tribune, 13 April 1947, p. 56, 17 April 1947, 8 May 1947; Hartford Times, 17 April 1947, 25 April 1947, p. 2, 6 May 1947, 8 May 1947, 12 May 1947, 14 May 1947, p. 1; Time, 21 April 1947, p. 58; David P. Gaines memos, 17 April 1947, PPLC 4-A and ACLU 1947 CL-2; Clifford L. Forster to Oliver L. Stringfield, 14 April 1947, Stringfield to Forster, 16 April 1947, Hetzel to Forster, 16 and 23 April 1947, Delevett to Forster, 18 April 1947, Forster to Skelly, 21 April 1947, ACLU 1947 CL-2; Hartford Courant, 23 April 1947, 25 April 1947, pp. 1, 12, 29 April 1947, 30 April 1947, 2 May 1947, p. 3, 8 May 1947, pp. 1, 2, 13 May 1947, 14 May 1947, p. 1, 15 May 1947, pp. 1, 14; Waterbury Republican, 26 April 1947, pp. 1, 3, 9 May 1947, p. 3; Gaines to B. Kenneth Anthony, 28 April 1947, PPLC 4-A; PPLC “Report on Where Things Stand,” 25 April 1947, PPLC 4-C; Mabel Robbins, Clergymen’s Advisory Committee Minutes, 25 April 1947, PPLC 23-A; Journal of the House, pp. 699, 733, 808 (1, 7, 16 May); New York Times, 5 May 1947, p. 25, 15 May 1947; Journal of the Senate, pp. 719, 752–753 (9 and 14 May 1947); The New Republic, 19 May 1947, p. 8; PPLC, “Doctors vs. Politicians: A Connecticut Episode,” June 1947, PPLC 3-N; Cunningham to Louis Harris, 5 June 1947, PPLC 24-E; Herbert S. MacDonald, “Some Aspects and Implications of the So-Called ‘Connecticut Birth Control Law’” (unpublished paper, October 1953), pp. 14–16, PPLC 5-J.

55. Hartford Courant, 15 May 1947, p. 12; Hartford Times, 15 May 1947; Field Committee Minutes, 19 May 1947, PPLC 23-D; Hetzel to Forster, 20 May 1947, and Forster to Hetzel, 27 May 1947, ACLU 1947 CL-2; Hetzel to Paul Ashton, 24 May 1947, PPLC 4-A; Pilpel to Cunningham, 28 May 1947, Cunningham to Pilpel, 29 May 1947, PPLC 4-J; Cunningham, “State Director’s Report,” 28 May 1947, Julie Howson, “President’s Report,” 28 May 1947, and Barbara Davenport, Annual Meeting Minutes, 28 May 1947, PPLC 11-F; Waterbury Republican, 13 May 1947, p. 8; Garrow conversation with Dr. Charles L. Larkin, Jr.; New York Times, 18 June 1947, p. 23; [Massachusetts] Planned Parenthood News, September 1947; David Loth, “Planned Parenthood and the Modern Inquisition,” The Humanist, Autumn 1947, pp. 64–68.

56. Pilpel to Cunningham, 2 June 1947, Rose to Janney and Cunningham, 4 June 1947, PPLC 4-J; Forster to Walter Gellhorn, and to Joseph L. Hetzel et al., 5 June 1947, John H. Foster to Forster, 6 June 1947, ACLU 1947 CL-2; Upson to Pilpel, 10 June 1947, “Minutes of Meeting of Six Connecticut Doctors,” 11 June 1947, PPLC 4-J; Hetzel to Forster, 12 June 1947, Delevett to Forster, 12 June 1947, Frederick E. Robin to Hetzel, 16 June 1947, Frances Levenson to Hetzel, 19 June and 7 August 1947, ACLU 1947 CL-2; Elizabeth Winslow, Executive Committee Minutes, 17 June 1947, PPLC 11-G; Pilpel to Hetzel, 3 July 1947, PPLC 4-I; Howson to Ernst, 22 July 1947, Pilpel to Upson, 12 August 1947, Cunningham to Upson, 14 August 1947, PPLC 4-J; Upson to Pilpel, 14 August 1947, PPLC 4-K; Hetzel to Levenson, 20 August 1947, Levenson to Pilpel, 22 August 1947, Pilpel to Levenson, 4 September 1947, ACLU 1947 CL-2; Robbins, Executive Committee Minutes, 9 September 1947, PPLC 11-G; Upson to Robbins, 11 September 1947, PPLC 4-J; Howson to Becket, 12 September 1947, Howson to Catherine J. Tilson, 12 September 1947, Tilson to Howson, 15 September 1947, PPLC 4-K; Levenson to Hetzel, 16 September 1947, ACLU 1947 CL-2; Elizabeth Winslow, Planning Committee Minutes, 17 September 1947, Ernst to Howson, 2 October 1947, PPLC 23-K; Winslow, Field Committee Minutes, 2 October 1947, Cunningham, Planning Committee Subcommittee Minutes, 8 October 1947, PPLC 23-E; Forster to Upson, 9 and 15 October 1947, PPLC 4-I; Cunningham, “Director’s Report,” and “Planning Committee Report,” 14 October 1947, PPLC 11-G and 23-K; Winslow, Board Minutes, 14 October 1947, PPLC 11-G; Cunningham, “Director’s Report,” and Charlotte Moser, Board Minutes, 9 December 1947, PPLC 11-G; Howson, “Annual Report,” 26 January 1948, PPLC 11-H; Robbins, Field Committee Minutes, 3 February 1948, PPLC 23-E; Hartford Courant, 10 March 1948, p. 1; Hartford Times, 10 March 1948; Connecticut Parenthood, April 1948; Cunningham, “Director’s Report,” 6 April 1948, Howson, “President’s Report,” Cunningham, “Director’s Report,” and Winslow, Annual Meeting Minutes, 29 April 1948, PPLC 11-H; Waterbury Republican, 30 April 1948, p. 3.

57. Eleanor Leiss, Field Committee Report, May 1948, PPLC 23-F; Robbins, Field Committee Minutes, 8 June 1948, PPLC 23-E; Leiss, Planning Committee Minutes, 8 July 1948, PPLC 23-K; Connecticut Parenthood, August 1948; John Q. Tilson, Jr. to Cunningham, 31 August 1948, PPLC 4-J; Cunningham, “Director’s Report,” and Sydney Brucker, Board Minutes, 29 September 1948, PPLC 11-I; New York Times, 1 November 1948, p. 15, 2 November 1948, p. 3; Danbury News-Times, 1 November 1948; Manchester Evening Herald, 1 November 1948; Hartford Times, 1 November 1948.

58. Chester Bowles, Promises to Keep (New York: Harper & Row, 1971), p. 187. On the 1948 Massachusetts referendum, see John R. Rodman, “Birth Control Politics in Massachusetts” (unpublished M.A. thesis, Harvard University, 1955), pp. 87–108; O’Toole, “Prelates and Politicos,” pp. 49–57, and William J. Kenealy, “Contraception—A Violation of God’s Law,” Catholic Mind 46 (September 1948): 552–564, at 558, 560–561, 563. Also see New York Times, 13 November 1948, p. 16; Newsweek, 15 November 1948, pp. 26–27; [Massachusetts) Planned Parenthood News, December 1948 and April 1949; Churchman, 1 December 1948, p. 10; The Nation 168 (5 March 1949): 262; and Lee N. Robins, “Birth Control in Massachusetts: The Analysis of an Issue Through an Intensive Survey of Opinion” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1950).

59. Elizabeth Winslow, Planning Committee Minutes, 8 November 1948, PPLC 23-K; Cunningham, “Director’s Report,” 16 November 1948, PPLC 11-H; William Hamilton to Katharine McKinney, 11 December 1948, Pilpel to Cunningham, 21 December 1948, PPLC 4-L; Cunningham to Pilpel, 5 January 194[9] (and attachment), PPLC 4-J and 4-M; Cunningham, “Director’s Report,” and Winslow, Board Minutes, 11 January 1949, PPLC 11-I; Pilpel to Cunningham, 28 January 1949, PPLC 4-L; Dorothy Bowles to Nancy Williams, 25 January 1949, PPLC 17-K Also generally see both Dorothy Bowles and Chester Bowles’s 1963 oral history interviews with Neil Gold for the Columbia Oral History Program.

60. Journal of the House, p. 307 (4 February); Journal of the Senate, p. 368 (8 February); Hartford Courant, 5 February 1949, pp. 1, 7, 30 March 1949, 6 April 1949, p. 2, 13 April 1949; Betty Simonds to Sanger, 3 January 1949, McKinney to Mary Compton, 12 January 1949, Cunningham to Sanger, 2 February 1949, Sanger-LC Box 180; Nancy Williams, Clergymen’s Advisory Committee Minutes, 7 February 1949, PPLC 23-A; Robbins, Field Committee Minutes, 8 February 1949, PPLC 23-E; Cunningham, “Director’s Report,” 8 March 1949, PPLC 11-I; Winslow, Executive Committee Minutes, 6 April 1949, PPLC 11-J; Bridgeport Herald, 10 April 1949, pp. 13–14; Transcript of Hearing, Public Health and Safety Committee, 12 April 1949, 44pp., Connecticut State Library; Hartford Times, 12 and 13 April 1949; New York Herald Tribune, 13 April 1949; Samuel C. Harvey to Cunningham, 19 April 1949, PPLC 4-L. On Senator Carl P. Remy’s unsuccessful bill “prohibiting future introduction of birth control measures,” see Journal of the Senate, pp. 272 and 526 (4 February and 31 March), and Journal of the House, p. 377 (8 February).

61. Hartford Courant, 6 May 1949, pp. 1, 2; Cunningham, “Annual Report,” 19 May 1949, PPLC 11-J; Elizabeth Winslow, Annual Meeting Minutes, 19 May 1949, PPLC 11-H; Connecticut Parenthood, June 1949 and February 1950; Charlotte Quaile, Executive Committee Minutes, 23 June 1949, Ruth Cain, Executive Committee Minutes, 30 August 1949, Quaile, Board Minutes, 4 October 1949, PPLC 11-J; Fairman C. Cowan to Loraine L. Campbell, 3 November 1949, PPLC 4-M and PPLM Box 106; Pilpel to Cunningham, 29 November 1949, PPLC 4-J; Cunningham, “Director’s Report,” and Laura Bushby, Board Minutes, 6 December 1949, PPLC 11-H and J; Winslow, Board Minutes, 14 February 1950, PPLC 11-K; Williams, Clergymen’s Advisory Committee Minutes, 20 March 1950, PPLC 23-A; Quaile, Executive Committee Minutes, 24 April 1950, PPLC 11-K.

On the 1949 legislative session in general, see particularly Joseph F. Skelley, Jr., “Executive-Legislative Relationship in Connecticut: A Case Study of Legislative Policy-Making” (unpublished B.A. thesis, Wesleyan University, 1950), and Joseph I. Lieberman, The Power Broker: A Biography of John M. Bailey, Modern Political Boss (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1966), pp. 130–132; also see Bowles, Promises to Keep, pp. 204–205, and Van Dusen, Connecticut, pp. 384–385.

62. Cunningham, “Annual Report,” 18 May 1950, PPLC 11-K; Connecticut Parenthood, Summer 1950 and Fall 1950; Virginia Dockham, Board Minutes, 19 September 1950, PPLC 11-K. The two Yale Law School students were Joseph F. Brodley and Edwin D. Etherington. Their eighty-page paper, “Contraception: Human Right or Criminal Deviation?” (25 May 1950, PPLC 4-M and N), reluctantly suggested that another declaratory judgment action was the league’s best hope, with there being at least some chance that a favorable three to two majority (composed of Nelson and Tileston dissenter Newell Jennings and new justices Raymond E. Baldwin and Ernst Inglis, and discounting Allyn Brown and new (Catholic) justice P. B. O’Sullivan) could be achieved. See esp. pp. 67, 70–72, and 80. On October 24, 1950, PPLC sponsored a conference on “Parenthood in a Democracy” at Connecticut College in New London, with Dr. John Rock and Rev. C. Lawson Willard among the speakers; the ten “sponsors” of the conference included retired Justice Christopher Avery, the other Nelson and Tileston dissenter, and—much more intriguingly—retired Chief Justice William M. Maltbie. One hence might easily infer that Maltbie’s votes in Nelson and Tileston were in no way influenced by any hostility toward or discomfort with birth control.

On the 1950 Connecticut election, see Bowles, Promises to Keep, pp. 234, 241; Lieberman, The Power Broker, p. 145; Duane Lockard, New England State Politics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1959), p. 262; Sidney Hyman, The Lives of William Benton (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969), pp. 406–413, 441–443; Alden Hatch, The Lodges of Massachusetts (New York: Hawthorn Books, 1973), pp. 239–240; John Davis Lodge’s 1967 oral history interview (esp. pp. 33–37) with John T. Mason, Jr., for the Columbia Oral History Program; and George Bush’s “Foreword” to Phyllis T. Piotrow, World Population Crisis: The United States Response (New York: Praeger, 1973), vii. George Bush refers to a Drew Pearson report that alleged his father backed birth control; John Alsop several weeks after the election wrote Molly Milmine that the word in Republican circles was that Bush “was beaten on account of his activities with” Planned Parenthood and that “it will probably have a frightening effect on other Republican politicians.” 24 November 1950, PPLC 4-M. No evidence of any contact between Prescott Bush and PPLC appears in either the voluminous and seemingly comprehensive PPLC records, or in the Prescott Bush Papers at Yale; also note the similar retrospective denials by both Prescott Bush (and Dorothy Bush) in Prescott Bush’s 1966 oral history interview (pp. 62–63) with John T. Mason, Jr., for the Columbia Oral History Program.

63. Ella Embree, Clergymen’s Advisory Committee Minutes, 11 December 1950, PPLC 23-A; Milmine to William Vogt, 9 January 1951, PPLC 4-M; Milmine, “Report for the Legislative Committee,” 9 January 1951, PPLC 4-O; Virginia Dockham, Board Minutes, 9 January 1951, Williams, Executive Committee Minutes, 19 January 1951, PPLC 11-L; J. Stephen Knight to Milmine, 15 May 1951, PPLC 5-H. Molly Milmine’s obituary appears in the 6 March 1984 Waterbury Republican.

On Bailey and Cooney in particular, see Lieberman, The Power Broker, pp. 46, 52, 56, 131–132, 156; Hartford Courant, 26 January 1933, p. 2, 19 April 1965; Cross, Connecticut Yankee, pp. 278–280, 314; Catholic Transcript, 24 January 1957. Bailey died in 1975; Cooney’s obituaries appear in the Courant, 16 August 1984, p. D8, and the New York Times, 18 August 1984, p. 10. Exceptionally good work on Connecticut state—and especially legislative—politics in the early 1950s was carried out by W. Duane Lockard. See “The Role of Party in the Connecticut General Assembly, 1931–1951” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1952), esp. pp. 76, 111–116, 129–132, 145–146, 181, 215, 239; “Legislative Politics in Connecticut,” American Political Science Review 48 (March 1954): 166–173, esp. 169–171; and New England State Politics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1959), pp. 228–304.

64. Williams, “Connecticut Story,” n.d. [c.May 1951], PPLC 6-J and 11-L; Milmine to Board Members, “Political Situation,” 26 January 1951, PPLC 4-M and 11-L; Journal of the House, pp. 273 and 304 (30 and 31 January); Journal of the Senate, pp. 192, 266 (30 and 31 January); Mabel Robbins to Lillian Mermin, 16 February 1951, PPLC 38-L; Mermin, “‘Uncontrolled’ Birth in Connecticut,” The Humanist 11 (October 1951): 221–226; Virginia Dockham, Board Minutes, 13 March 1951, PPLC 11-L; [Joseph P. Cooney], “Report of Activities and Efforts to Oppose the Planned Parenthood Bill in 1951,” n.d., 3pp., Hartford Archdiocese Archives; Transcript of Hearing, Public Health and Safety Committee, 11 April 1951, 26pp., PPLC 4-O and Connecticut State Library; Hartford Courant, 12 April 1951, p. 5; New York Times, 12 April 1951; Hartford Times, 12 April 1951, p. 30; Willard to Public Health and Safety Committee, 21 April 1951, PPLC 4-P. John J. Hayes, chancellor of the Hartford Diocese from 1945 to 1953, was born in 1906, ordained in 1931, and died in 1964.

65. Rev. E. Paul Sylvester to Milmine, 21 April 1951, Milmine to Sylvester, 3 May 1951, PPLC 4-R; Williams, “Director’s Annual Report,” 16 May 1951, and Williams, “Connecticut Story,” n.d. [c.May 1951], Milmine, Annual Report, 16 May 1951, and Virginia Dockham, Annual Meeting Minutes, 16 May 1951, PPLC 11-L. Also see Milmine to Thomas Sugrue, 21 January 1952, PPLC 24-F.

66. Journal of the House, pp. 680 and 717–722 (23 and 28 May); Journal of the Senate, p. 712 (29 May); Transcript of Proceedings, Connecticut General Assembly, House of Representatives, 28 May 1951, pp. 1453–1467, Connecticut State Library; Hartford Courant, 29 May 1951, p. 3; New York Herald Tribune, 29 May 1951; PPLC, “Closer and Closer to Victory,” n.d., PPLC 11-L; Milmine in Connecticut Parenthood, July 1951; Herbert S. MacDonald, “Some Aspects and Implications of the So-Called ‘Connecticut Birth Control Law’” (unpublished paper, October 1953), p. 17, PPLC 5-J. Also see Lockard, “The Role of Party,” pp. 179, 258–261, who commented that “Bailey virtually runs the Democratic Senate” and that “Bailey is virtually omnipresent in the legislative halls during sessions of the legislature.”

67. May-Louise Iszard, Executive Committee Minutes, 20 June 1951, Board Minutes, 18 September 1951, PPLC 11-M; [Milmine], “Opinions of Mr. John Parsons and Mr. Buist Anderson on the Etherington Test Case,” 18 September 1951, Wiggin to Williams, 1 October 1951, PPLC 5-H; Charlotte Quaile, Board Minutes, 15 October 1951, PPLC 11-M; Milmine to Riege, 18 October 1951, Milmine to Wiggin, 19 October 1951, Riege to Milmine, 24 October 1951, PPLC 5-H.

68. Riege to Milmine, 5 November 1951, PPLC 5-H; May-Louise Iszard, Board Minutes, 13 November and 14 December 1951, PPLC 11-M; Pilpel to Loraine Campbell, 30 November 1951, PPLM Box 14; [Riege], “Memorandum Re: Recommendations Concerning Possible Legal Actions,” n.d. [13 December 1951], 8pp., PPLC 1-B and 5-J; Iszard, Board Minutes, 18 January 1952, PPLC 11-N; Milmine to Riege, 21 January 1952, PPLC 5-K; Milmine to Board Members, 31 January 1952, PPLC 11-N.

69. Mabel Robbins, Executive Committee Minutes, 5 February 1952, PPLC 11-N; Loraine Campbell to Milmine, 29 January 1952, Riege to Campbell, 7 February 1952, PPLM Box 106; Grace Adkins, Executive Committee Minutes, 3 March 1952, PPLC 11-N; Milmine to Seymour, 3 and 11 March 1952, Seymour to Milmine, 5 March 1952, and Milmine to Riege, 11 March 1952, PPLC 5-H; Claudia McGinley, Board Minutes, 18 March 1952, PPLC 11-N; Riege to Milmine, 20 March 1952, Riege to Seymour, 1 May 1952, Seymour to Riege, 5 May 1952, Riege to Milmine, 12 May and 3 June 1952, PPLC 5-H.

70. Laura Bushby, Executive Committee Minutes, 2 May 1952, Nancy Williams, “Director’s Annual Report,” 15 May 1952, and May-Louise Iszard, Annual Meeting Minutes, 15 May 1952, PPLC 11-N; Ruth Cain, Board Minutes, 14 August 1952, PPLC 11-O; Riege to Seymour, 11 August 1952, Seymour to Riege, 22 August 1952, PPLC 5-H; Riege to Seymour, 9 September 1952, PPLC 5-I; Iszard, Executive Committee Minutes, 9 September 1952, PPLC 11-O; Loraine Campbell to Workum, 11 and 19 September 1952, PPLM Box 106; Riege to Milmine, 22 September 1952, PPLC 5-I.

71. [Riege], “Memorandum Re: Conference with Mr. Whitney North Seymour,” 14 October 1952, PPLC 5-I; Ida Abrahams, Board Minutes, 28 October 1952, PPLC 11-O; Connecticut Parenthood, Fall 1952; Imogene Monk, Board Minutes, 18 November 1952, PPLC 11-O; Milmine to Buist Anderson, 18 November 1952, PPLC 5-I; Catherine J. Tilson to Jane Daniells, 26 November 1952, PPLC 4-P; Charlotte Quaile, Board Minutes, 9 December 1952, PPLC 11-O; Milmine to John C. Parsons, 15 December 1952, PPLC 4-P; Milmine, “Notes for Legal File,” 13 January 1953, PPLC 5-I; Imogene Monk, Board Minutes, 13 January 1953, PPLC 11-P; Seymour to Riege, 15 January 1953, Milmine to Riege, 2 February 1953, PPLC 5-I. On Bruce Manternach, see the Hartford Courant, 3 January 1949.

72. Journal of the House, p. 269 (3 February); Journal of the Senate, p. 279 (4 February); 1953 Connecticut General Assembly Records (RG 2), Box 312; Imogene Monk, Board Minutes, 10 February 1953, PPLC 11-P; Williams to Milmine, 16 February 1953, PPLC 4-R; Milmine to Dr. Charles Seymour, and to Warren Upson, 16 February 1953, PPLC 4-P; Williams to Margaret Bourke-White, 19 February 1953, PPLC 52-I; Jane M. Daniells to Regina Tomlin, 19 February 1953, Lodge Box 548; Milmine to John H. Pinkerman, 20 February 1953, Pinkerman to Milmine, 1 March 1953, PPLC 32-H and 4-R; Florence B. Darrach to Lodge, 4 March 1953, Lodge Box 548; Pinkerman to Williams, 8 March 1953, PPLC 4-R; Imogene Monk, Board Minutes, 10 March 1953, PPLC 11-P.

73. [Penciled Notes], “Maternal Health Bill,” Leonard D. Adkins to Lodge, 16 and 25 March 1953, Meade Alcorn to Lodge, 21 March 1953 (and 2pp. 19 March Riege enclosure), Lodge to Adkins, 7 April 1953 (and multiple 27 March drafts of same), Lodge Box 548. Also see Hartford Courant, 23 March 1953; Connecticut Parenthood, Spring [23 March] 1953; Bridgeport Herald, 29 March 1953; Julie B. Howson to Lodge, 6 April 1953, Katherine A. Evarts to Lodge, 13 April 1953, Lodge Box 548; and Lockard, New England State Politics, p. 261.

74. Transcript of Hearing, Public Health and Safety Committee, 1 April 1953, 14pp., Connecticut State Library; Arnold Felton, “Report on Hearing …” 3 April 1953, PPLM Box 105; Hartford Courant, 2 April 1953, 6 April 1953, p. 3; New Haven Register, 2 April 1953; Middletown Press, 2 April 1953; Hartford Times, 2 April 1953, 6 April 1953; [Joseph P. Cooney], untitled, annotated typescript, n.d. [5 April 1953], Birth Control File, Archives of the Hartford Archdiocese.

75. John C. Parsons to Benton H. Grant, 6 April 1953, PPLC 4-R; Hartford Times, 7 and 14 April 1953; Hartford Courant, 8 and 15 April 1953; Milmine notes, 10 and 11 April 1953, PPLC 4-R; Adkins to Lodge, 13 April 1953, Lodge Box 548; Milmine, “Report on Political Situation,” 14 April 1953, Grant to Milmine, and Milmine to Grant, 14 April 1953, Milmine notes, 14 April 1953, PPLC 4-R; Imogene Monk, Board Minutes, 14 April 1953, PPLC 11-P; New York Times, 15 April 1953, p. 45; New York Herald Tribune, 15 April 1953.

76. Hartford Times, 15 and 16 April 1953; Middletown Press, 15 April 1953; Hartford Courant, 16 April 1953, 17 April 1953, p. 11, 18 April 1953, p. 1; Waterbury Republican, 16 April 1953, p. 2; New York Times, 16 April 1953, p. 33, 19 April 1953, p. 46; Milmine to Grant, 17 April 1953, PPLC 4-R; Milmine to Lodge, 17 April 1953, PPLC 5-E; Hayes to Lodge, 18 April 1953, and Lodge to Hayes, 6 May 1953, Lodge Box 548. Lodge apparently was already unfavorably disposed toward PPLC as a result of his earlier meeting with Williams and Daniells; a subsequent note reflecting back upon the meeting and its aftermath read: “Apparently their desire is to attack me rather than to obtain action on legislation.” “Maternal Health Bill” notes, Lodge Box 548.

77. Bridgeport Herald, 19 April 1953, pp. 19, 23; Grant to Milmine, 19 and 21 April 1953, PPLC 4-R; Lodge to Milmine, 21 and 24 April 1953, and Lodge to Adkins, 22 April 1953, Lodge Box 548; John Pinkerman to Milmine, 22 April 1953, PPLC 32-H; Milmine to Grant, 23 April 1953, PPLC 4-S; Grant to “Mrs. Rogers,” 28 April 1953, PPLC 5-A and 38-M; Manternach to Fisher, 30 March 1953, PPLC 5-J; Upson to Milmine, 30 April 1953, PPLC 5-E.

78. Imogene Monk, Executive Committee Minutes, 1 May 1953, PPLC 11-P; Milmine to William Vogt, 1 May 1953, PPLC 4-R; Adkins to Lodge, 4 May 1953, Lodge Box 548; Hartford Times, 5 and 7 May 1953; Hartford Courant, 6 and 10 May 1953, 12 May 1953, p. 2; New York Times, 6 May 1953, p. 33; Lodge to Adkins, 12 May 1953, Lodge Box 548; Countryman to Milmine, 8 July 1953, and Milmine to Countryman, 9 July 1953, PPLC 5-F. Also see State of New Jersey v. Tracy, 102 A.2d 52 (App. Div., N.J. Superior Court, 21 December 1953).

79. Waterbury Republican, 13 and 19 May 1953, 21 May 1953, p. 2; Milmine to Regional and Local Chairmen, 14 May 1953, PPLC 11-Q; Hartford Courant, 16 May 1953, p. 2, 17 and 21 May 1953; New York Times, 16 May 1953; Adkins to Lodge, 17 May 1953, Lodge Box 548; Journal of the House, pp. 875–877, 907, 990, 1017 (18, 20, 22 May); Journal of the Senate, pp. 809, 883, 895 (20, 22, 24 May); 1953 Connecticut General Assembly Records (RG 2), Box 312; Hartford Times, 20 May 1953; Lodge to Adkins, 21 May 1953, Lodge Box 548. Also see Bridgeport Herald, 14 June 1953.

PPLC’s May 12 annual meeting was relatively uneventful, although one chairperson of a lesser committee reported that “the name of our organization is an increasingly active and powerful force against us,” and recommended—apparently without second—that it be changed to “the League for Maternal Health.” Mrs. Ralph A. Stevenson, “Report—Public Speaking Committee,” and Imogene Monk, Annual Meeting Minutes, 12 May 1953, PPLC 11-Q.

80. Journal of the House, pp. 1024–1029 (27 May); Transcript of Proceedings, Connecticut General Assembly, House of Representatives, 27 May 1953, pp. 3214–3240, Connecticut State Library, esp. pp. 3219–3220, 3222, 3229; Hartford Courant, 28 May 1953, p. 5, 29 May 1953, p. 3; Waterbury Republican, 28 May 1953, pp. 1, 18, 29 May 1953; Journal of the Senate, pp. 913 and 941–942 (27 and 28 May); Transcript of Proceedings, Senate, 28 May 1953, pp. 1977–1984; New York Times, 29 May 1953, p. 12; New York Herald Tribune, 29 May 1953; Hartford Times, 29 May 1953; Milmine to Board Members, to Grant, and to Ivor L. Kenway, 29 May 1953, Grant columns, n.d., PPLC 5-A. Also see John H. Pinkerman to Milmine, 24 July 1953, and Milmine to Pinkerman, 30 July 1953, PPLC 32-H.

81. Milmine to Samuel C. Harvey, 29 May 1953, PPLC 4-S; Milmine to Dr. N. William Wawro, 8 June 1953, PPLC 5-J; Imogene Monk, Board Minutes, 9 June 1953, PPLC 11-R; Nancy Williams to Helen I. Clarke, 15 June 1953, PPLC 5-A; Milmine to Rev. Arthur Paterson, 23 June 1953, Milmine to Manternach, 4 August 1953, Manternach to Milmine, 1 October 1953, Milmine to Manternach, 7 October 1953, Milmine to Evarts, and to Fisher, and to Dr. Edward H. Wray, Jr., 15 October 1953, PPLC 5-K; Milmine to Dr. Helen Ferguson, 26 October 1953, PPLC 5-I. Also see Loraine Campbell to Francis Goodale, 4 August 1953, PPLM Box 106.

82. Stanley A. Leavy to Williams, and to Fredrick C. Redlich, 2 July 1953, Milmine to Miriam Harper, 10 November 1953, and Harper to Milmine, 12 November 1953, PPLC 16-H; Imogene Monk, Board Minutes, 13 October and 10 November 1953, PPLC 11-R; Jane Daniells, Program Survey Committee Minutes, 24 October and 6 November 1953, PPLC 23-N; Milmine, “Notes on Talk with Mr. Adkins,” 5 November 1953, PPLC 5-F; Roessle McKinney to Milmine, 3 December 1953, Milmine to McKinney, 5 December 1953, PPLC 19-A; Milmine, “President’s Report,” 18 May 1954, PPLC 11-S. On the early PPLC relationship with the infertility clinic, see Connecticut Parenthood, December 1947, and H. M. Feine, “Public Relations Activities,” May 1948, PPLC 24-C. On Dr. Thoms, see his obituaries in the New Haven Register, 29 October 1972, pp. A1, A6, and the New Haven Journal-Courier, 30 October 1972, p. 7. C. Lee Buxton’s appointment as Thoms’s successor was announced in mid-November; see Hartford Times, 21 November 1953.

83. Griswold Interview with Cheek, p. 26; Milmine to Molly Cunningham, 4 December 1953, PPLC 22-K.