Prosecuting Abortion in Connecticut
Very few cases of prosecution for abortion in colonial America exist. Of those that do, the case of Sarah Grosvenor may be unique, since it includes a description of an attempted surgical abortion. In 1742, unmarried Sarah Grosvenor of Pomfret, Connecticut became pregnant. Pressured by her lover, Amasa Sessions, to take an herbal abortifacient and, later, to undergo a surgical abortion at the hands of Doctor John Hallowell, Sarah tragically died from an infection. Notably, the grand jury failed to return an indictment against Hallowell for Sarah’s murder and no indictment for murder was even considered for her unborn fetus. Instead, the jury found Hallowell guilty of having attempted to destroy “the Health and Soundness of the said Sarah…and [of] the said fruit of her body.” The documents in this case suggest several things: that abortion was readily imaginable as a solution to unwanted pregnancy, that it nevertheless still might provoke feelings of shame, and that women, then as now, bore a heavier burden than did men.
Deposition of Abigail Nightingale
Several years after Sarah Grosvenor’s death, her friend Abigail Nightingale gave testimony about both the circumstances that led Sarah to “take the trade” (i.e. to use an abortifacient) and about the surgical abortion that ultimately killed her. Several things in Abigail’s testimony are worth noting. First is the fact that Sarah did not try to procure an abortifacient on her own but was rather coerced into taking one by her lover Amasa Sessions, who denied paternity of the child, appeared reluctant to marry Sarah, and may have wished to avoid having to support any illegitimate child born to her. The second is Sarah’s sense of shame upon Abigail’s discovery of her predicament. That shame may well have stemmed from the third noteworthy aspect of Abigail’s testimony: namely, that Sarah had likely felt the movement of the fetus at the point when Sessions insisted she begin “taking the trade.” According to Abigail’s testimony, Sarah told Sessions that she “feared it was too late" and informed Dr. Hallowell that she had felt the child for "about a fortnight." Sarah’s shame, in other words, may have proceeded not so much from the use of an abortifacient per se but from a fear of the possible consequences of having used one after the child had “quickened.”
Deposition of Zerviah Grosvenor
The testimony of Sarah Grosvenor’s sister Zerviah reveals interesting differences in how the women and men involved in this case understood and approached abortion. When, for example, Sarah informs her sister that she has been “taking the trade,” Zerviah immediately understands her meaning, suggesting that these women were familiar enough with the idea of using an herbal abortifacient to use a common euphemism for the act. When, however, Zerviah advises Sessions to marry Sarah and asks him “why they had taken the Method they had,” his reply suggests that fear of parental disapproval loomed larger than any qualms he might have had about procuring an abortion. While both examples reveal a measure of familiarity with and acceptance of abortion as a practice, Sessions’ response highlights his willingness to coerce Sarah’s decision for the sake of his own reputation and happiness.
__________
To learn more about the case of Sarah Grosvenor, please visit the website "Taking the Trade" maintained by Professor Cornelia Dayton of the Department of History of the University of Connecticut.