As always, you can find the Dobbs v. Jackson decision here.

Paragraph 3 of 8

Sentence 2 of 3

Finally! The next sentence is a single, simple claim that is easily investigated. It reads:

“In 1732, for example, Eleanor Beare was convicted of ‘destroying the Foetus in the Womb’ of another woman and ‘thereby causing her to miscarry.’”26

The Court has made our investigation easy in this case by indicating the source of this information in end note 26:

“2 Gentleman’s Magazine 931 (Aug. 1732).”

Now the Court is using end notes for citation rather than for explanation and argument, and that is refreshing. Unlike the last few references, this one is relatively easy to track down online. I found it here.

The difficulty this time isn’t in finding the material—it’s deciphering it. Here’s the first mention of “Mrs Beare” in the full-text version linked above:

Ponvap, 14. At the Affizesat Derby, Fohn Wain- G wright and John Blafdale were try’d for the Muordér of Samuel Dod of Alfreton, ‘but acquitted. Daniel Mrachlin, indiéted for ftealing a Gold Watch, and fonie Gold and Silver, the Goods of Capt. Woolley, pleaded Guil- ty, and is to be tranfported. [See the Tryal of Mrs Beare, p. 932.)

And this is what passes for argument in the case:

Counsen. Gentlemen, You have -heard the Indiétment read, and may obferve, that the Mifdemeanor for which the Prifoner ttands indicted, ‘is of a moft fhocking Nature; to deftroy the Fruit in the Womb carries fome- thing tn it {0 contrary to the natural Tender- nefs of the Female Sex, that. I am amazed how ever any Woman fhould arrive at fuch a degree of Impiezy and Cruelty, as.to attempe it in fuch a manner as che Prifoner has done, it has really fomething fo fhocking in it, that I cannot well difplay the Nature of the Crime to you, but mutt leave ic ro the Evidence: It is cruel and barbarous to ‘the laft degree,

It’s actually easier to read from the PDF than from the transcription. Here’s my own transcription of the PDF:

“Counsel. Gentlemen, you have heard the Indictment read, and may observe, that the Misdemeanor for which the Prisoner stands indicted, is of a most shocking Nature; to destroy the Fruit in the Womb carries something in it so contrary to the natural Tenderness of the Female Sex, that I am amazed how ever any Woman should arrive at such a degree of Impiety and Cruelty, as to attempt it in such a manner as the Prisoner has done, it has really something so shocking in it, that I cannot well display the Nature of the Crime to you, but must leave it to the Evidence; it is cruel and barbarous to the last degree.

This citation verifies the Dobbs claim as true, and with that true claim establishes a bit of history and tradition. That’s all it establishes, though. It doesn’t make the case that there was good reason for abortion to be considered a crime in this case—just that it was. There is no argument in what is written here—just a series of assertions. Here they are separated:

• The Misdemeanor for which the prisoner stands indicted is of a most shocking nature.
• [T]o destroy the Fruit in the Womb carries something in it so contrary to the natural Tenderness of the Female Sex that I am amazed how any Woman could be so impious and cruel
• [I]t has really something so shocking in it that I cannot well display the Nature of the Crime to you, but must leave it to the Evidence;
• [I]t is cruel and barbarous to the last degree.

Just four assertions. No argument. But that’s not what this claim, this sentence, is meant to do. This sentence just establishes that abortion was considered a crime in this instance of what the Court judges to be our history and tradition, and in this case, it was. This claim is true:

• “In 1732, for example, Eleanor Beare was convicted of ‘destroying the Foetus in the Womb’ of another woman and ‘thereby causing her to miscarry.’”