Birth control laws : $b shall we keep them, change them, or abolish themDennett, Mary Ware
History
Birth control laws : $b shall we keep them, change them, or abolish them
Dennett, Mary Ware
Birth control; Birth control -- Law and legislation -- United States
_Mr. Johnson_: It is accomplished in this way: If you decrease the
proportion of inferiors in the population you increase the general
economic and social welfare of the whole population.
_Senator Spencer_: You increase the relative number of superiors?
_Mr. Johnson_: Yes: and absolutely also. If we increase the social
welfare, then the superiors are willing to have more children and
will have more children. One of the things that prevents superiors
from having more children is the excessive reproduction of inferiors.
The appraisal of the merit of any proposed legislation is often
facilitated by an inspection of the objections offered to it, and by
consideration of the circumstances under which the objections are
made. But to reproduce here the whole fifteen pages of closely printed
words that constituted the testimony of the chief opposition speaker
for whom the Hearing on the Cummins-Vaile Bill was reopened a month
later, would be quite as much of an imposition on the reader as it was
upon the Committee who had to listen to it, and upon the government
which had to print it. It is estimated that it costs 50 cents a word
to print the Congressional Record. Reports cost presumably about the
same. But in view of the grave inhibition as to action which afflicted
the Judiciary Committee, it may be that they felt grateful rather than
imposed upon, for the delay involved and the time consumed; it put off
the responsibility of doing anything just so much longer. It may be
significant that the Chairman of the Hearing said at the close of this
interminable statement, “We are very glad to have heard from you,” and
no such similar appreciation was expressed to any of the other speakers.
The circumstances under which this second hearing was held are
noteworthy. It came on May 9th. Ten days previous it was discovered
that the reports of the first hearing were all ready to print, but
were being held on official order. On May 3rd the Director of the
Voluntary Parenthood League was told by the Secretary of the Chairman
of the House Sub-Committee that the Chairman of the full Committee
wished some additional material added to the Hearing Report, and that
the printing would be delayed on that account. As several written
statements had been filed as part of the testimony which there had not
been time to have read at the Hearing, the assumption was that this
material was another such statement. But by May 7th it was learned
that the Hearing was to be reopened on the 9th. There was no publicity
on the announcement and it was only at the eleventh hour that Mr.
Vaile himself was notified. Fortunately friends of the bill came on
telegraphed call, to be on hand to answer the opposition or the queries
of the Committee.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account