The Washington times., 1924-03-05
By HON. WILLIAM N. VALE.

SeBVACes
In reply to many inquiries. per.
sonally and by mail. concerning the
purpose Of my bill, which is similar
to bill introduced in the Senate
by Senator Cummings, It may be ap-
proprtate to state what this bill Is
not.
First--It IL not. as many people
seem to assume, bill ito limit the
size of families
Its purpose IL to legalize the
transmlsslonf through the mail of
scientific information about the pre-
vention and control Of births. But
the question, whether such knowl-
edge shall be applied, IL entirely for
the decision of. the individual. People
whose religious or conscientious
scruples forbid them to limit the
size Of their families are under no
compulsion to use such knowledge
But people who cannot prudently or
safely have children on account Of
inability to properly support them,
or on account of the il-health Of
either parent. or on account Of any
hereditary faint, which II would be
unfair to transmit to innocent off
spring, can be legally advised how
to prevent the coming of such off.
spring.
Benefit Cited.
Second-It Ia not q bill to legal.
ize the crime Of killing unborn in
fants. =
On the contrary. 1t is believed
that the lawful giving Of scientific
Information on how to prevent
births will largely do away with
the crime Of killing unborn babies,
and its harvest of deaths, crippleS,
and wrecked lives.
Third-It is not a bill to make
immortality safe" OF course. it is
quite possible that the information
would sometimes be improperly and
unlawfully used. know Of no
scientific knowledge in the history
of mankind which has not been
abused. But sincerely believe that
such abuse would not be worse than
the tragedy Of little children being
born out Of wedlock to be sup
ported by the state, and to grow
up without parental love and care,
and the tragedy of unfortunate, but
not vicious. girls who kill unborn
babies, or terminate their own lives,
rather than face the cruel penalty
which society exacts for their error.
!
ger to public morality Is greatly
overrated by the few opponents Of
this bill. This conviction is based
on the experience Of countries
| where such information may law
fully be given. and upon observa-
ton Of classes Of society in which
it is applied. even though unlaw.
fully obtained.
Lawful i'm Some Countries.
In Holland and New Zealand Il
is lawful to give such information
under regulations to guard against
harmful or dangerous practices).
Those countries certainly are not
low in their general moral stand
| ards. But in all countries, and
especially in our own, it is COM
mon knowledge that the educated
and well-to.do have this knowledge
now. and use it. Surely no one
would seriously contend that their
standard OF sex morality is lower
than that of the ignorant and un.
fortunate classes Of the community,
who cannot obtain such knowledge
With our hospital wards filled
with poor mothers who cannot nav
small hospital fee for their con.
I1nement, with our homes for de.
fective children crowded to their
capacity, with our statistics showing
that half Of the infants to survive
the first year Of their little lives
die on account Of poverty or social
disease Of their parents, it is time
that we should abandon our present
stupid practice of refusing to allow
any limit on the production of those
who will be untitled for life's strug.
gle, while at the same time rer.
mitting-because we cannot prevent
the limitation Of the fit.
Child's Right To Be Wanted.
believe that real morality IS not
consistent with cruelty.
And ! believe that "the first
right Of the child is to be wanted. .