Thread by @DSiPaint

I have previously written several threads on historical nuggets found while researching for Criminal Abortion Laws Before the Fourteenth Amendment.

However, I was unable to find many answers to questions, as well. This thread looks at one such topic.

#AbortionBefore14A

1/

An earlier nugget discussed Rep John Bingham as the author of the 14th Amendment’s contentious 1st section & that he held firm belief in the Constitution protecting natural rights, something afforded to the unborn, as explained by Supreme Court Justice James Wilson in 1790.

2/

That hinted Bingham’s intent for “person” in the 14th Amendment to apply to the unborn as victims in criminal law. He elsewhere stated his intent for the amendment to protect all human beings equally, another inference of the unborn.

Yet, neither was the home run I sought.

3/

I looked elsewhere: speeches, biographies, voting records, etc. Some offered hints but little more.

I hoped for answers later in his congressional career, which extended through March 3, 1873. Interestingly, that was the exact date the House ratified the Comstock Laws.

4/

The Comstock Laws existed beyond scope of the book, but if they offered a glimpse at firm intent of Bingham’s meaning of “person” (by way of vote or floor debate) regarding a Federal ban that included abortions, then that would firmly be in scope & hopefully establish intent.

5/

At the time, The Congressional Globe was the publication for floor debates, reports, roll calls, etc. When the next term started a day later, The Congressional Record — a much more detailed publication — replaced it. Sadly, the Globe almost never recorded voting records.

6/

Concerning the Comstock Laws, an amendment received a vote of 100 yeas & 37 noes with no further details. All other records simply stated that actions passed. It wasn’t even clear if Bingham was present at the time of the debate or the votes.

I had sadly reached a dead end.

7/7