Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-ct24h Total loading time: 0.66 Render date: 2022-05-27T06:27:15.893Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

Abortion in South Asia, 1860–1947: A medico-legal history

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 May 2020

MITRA SHARAFI*
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin Law School Email: mitra.sharafi@wisc.edu

Abstract

In the progression of stages toward unintended lives, the two stops on either side of abortion—contraception and infanticide—have been studied extensively by historians of South Asia. We know much less about abortion, particularly during the colonial period. Drawing upon published judgments, unpublished case records, forensic toxicology reports, and treatises on Indian medical jurisprudence, this article suggests that anti-abortion law was generally enforced in colonial India only when women died as a result of illegal abortions. This approach was contrary to the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which criminalized most abortions even when the women survived. The pattern was a continuation of the pre-IPC approach in India. This article explores possible explanations for the lax enforcement of anti-abortion law in South Asia during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, considering abortion as experienced by South Asian and British women alike. It proposes as contributing factors: challenges in detection, the social movement for the protection of Hindu widows, colonial anxieties about false allegations of abortion among South Asians, the common phenomenon of imperial (British) husbands and wives living apart, and physicians’ desire to protect doctor–patient confidentiality. The article focuses on two key cases involving abortion: the Whittaker-Templeton case from Hyderabad (1896–1902) in which a British woman died following an abortion; and the Parsi matrimonial case of T. v. T. from Bombay (1927), in which a Zoroastrian woman alleged that her pharmacist husband had forced her to terminate three pregnancies by ingesting drugs.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Earlier versions of this article were presented at the Berkshire Conference on the History of Women, Hurst Summer Institute in Legal History, University of Hawaii-Manoa, Rutgers University, Stanford University, and the University of Wisconsin–Madison (2008–19). For comments and references, I thank Donald R. Davis, James Jaffe, Jack Jin Gary Lee, Alastair McClure, Projit B. Mukharji, Bhavani Raman, Benjamin Schonthal, Martha Selby, Gopika Solanki, Julia Stephens, Tara Suri, Yuhan Sohrab-Dinshaw Vevaina, Barbara Welke, #twitterstorians, and the two anonymous reviewers. Elizabeth Lhost translated the 1861 Urdu document described in note 87. Divya Cherian and Priyasha Saksena shared unpublished work with me. Alexandra Fleagle, Brian L. Kuhl, Amy McGann, and Lesley Skousen provided research assistance. I thank the UW Graduate School for funding and UW Law librarians for their professionalism. Shelfmarks beginning with IOR indicate sources from the India Office Records of the Asia, Pacific, and Africa Collections, British Library (BL). NAI indicates material from the National Archives of India. BHC refers to the Bombay High Court, BMJ to the British Medical Journal, ILR to the various regional series of the Indian Law Reports, IMG to the Indian Medical Gazette, IPC to the Indian Penal Code, and PCMC to the Parsi Chief Matrimonial Court of Bombay. POB stands for Proceedings of the Old Bailey, available at https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/ [accessed 25 May 2018], TI to the Times of India, and TL to the Times of London. The Hyderabad abortion case records are housed at the BL and NAI. T. v. T. case records are contained in PCMC notebooks (courtroom 21, BHC). I have not revealed the full names of the parties in T. v. T. for the sake of descendants. Although abortion and miscarriage were used synonymously circa 1900, abortion in this article refers to the deliberate termination (not the involuntary loss) of a pregnancy. In addition to Latin botanical names, I have included some transliterated Hindustani or Hindi plant names.

References

1 Dulip Singh, ‘Modes of Inducing Criminal Abortion in the Punjab’, IMG (Jan. 1885), p. 9.

2 Parry, L. A., Criminal Abortion (London: John Bale, Sons and Danielsson, 1932), p. 18Google Scholar.

3 For examples, see untitled editorial, TI (17 May 1881), p. 2; ‘Sessions Trial No.40 of 1871: Government v. Zuhoorun, Nurau and Moona, Accused of Causing Miscarriage’, Central India Agency, Sessions Trials. Proc. No.40, 1871 (NAI); and Queen-Empress v. Ademma ILR Madras, vol. 9, 1886, pp. 369–71.

4 See Appendix A.

5 Merry, Sally Engle, ‘Colonial and Postcolonial Law’, in Blackwell Companion to Law and Society, (ed.) Sarat, Austin (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004), pp. 575–6Google Scholar. On gap studies, see Gould, Jon B. and Barclay, Scott, ‘Mind the Gap: The Place of Gap Studies in Sociolegal Scholarship’, Annual Review of Law and Social Science, vol. 8, 2012, pp. 323–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Relatedly, see Likhovski, Assaf, Law and Identity in Mandate Palestine (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2006), pp. 97102Google Scholar. On missionaries and abortion, see Thomson, Basil, The Fijians: A Study of the Decay of Custom (London: William Heinemann, 1908), pp. 221–2Google Scholar; and Levine, Philippa, ‘Sexuality, Gender, and Empire’, in Gender and Empire, (ed.) Philippa Levine (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), p. 147CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 On under-enforcement in England, see Brookes, Barbara, Abortion in England 1900–1967 (London: Croom Helm, 1988), pp. 2250Google Scholar.

8 Klausen, Susanne, Abortion under Apartheid: Nationalism, Sexuality and Women's Reproductive Rights in South Africa (New York: Oxford University Press, 2015), p. 16CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Dickens, Bernard M. and Cook, Rebecca J., ‘Development of Commonwealth Abortion Laws’, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 3, 1979, pp. 425–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

9 Thomson, The Fijians, pp. 226–7. See Appendix B.

10 On the use of abortion by tea-plantation workers, see Guha, Supriya, ‘The Unwanted Pregnancy in Colonial Bengal’, Indian Economic and Social History Review, vol. 33, 1996, pp. 423–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Guha also describes abortion by slave women earlier in the nineteenth century (pp. 422–3).

11 Hehir, Patrick and Gribble, J. D. B., Medical Jurisprudence for India (Madras: Associated Publishers, 1929), p. 660Google Scholar. Marie Stopes and other British contraception advocates mistakenly believed that married women in India did not often use abortion. See Chowdhury, Indira, ‘Delivering the “Murdered Child”: Infanticide, Abortion, and Contraception in Colonial India’, in Medical Encounters in British India, (eds) Kumar, D. and Sekhar, R. (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2013), pp. 287–8Google Scholar.

12 Mukherji, Santosh Kumar, Prostitution in India (Calcutta: Das Gupta, 1934), pp. 147, 165, 264–6Google Scholar. On Mukherji's prostitution-related writings, see Mitra, Durba, ‘Translation as Techné: Female Sexuality and the Science of Social Progress in Colonial India’, History and Technology, vol. 31, no. 4, 2016, pp. 365–7Google Scholar.

13 Being ‘heavy-footed’ was a euphemism for being pregnant in many South Asian languages. On Singapore, see Warren, James Francis, Ku, Ah, and Karayuki-san, , Prostitution in Singapore 1870–1940 (Singapore: National University of Singapore, 2003), pp. 353–8Google Scholar.

14 Mukherji, Prostitution in India, pp. 161–4, 264. Elite courtesans ‘took great care of their health’ and may have had reasonable access to healthcare, unlike ‘brothel women’ (Mukherji, Prostitution in India, p. 266). On Hindu widows in the sex trade, see Banerjee, Sumanta, Under the Raj: Prostitution in Colonial Bengal (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1998), pp. 7881Google Scholar, 88, 112.

15 Dubois, Abbé, Hindu Manners, Customs and Ceremonies (Oxford: Clarendon, 1906), p. 197Google Scholar; and Vidyá-Bhúshan, Shyámácharan, Vyavasthá-Darpana: A Digest of Hindu Law as Current in Bengal (Calcutta: Dinanath Sarkar, 1883), p. 208Google Scholar. See generally Lipner, Julius J., ‘The Classical Hindu View on Abortion and the Moral Status of the Unborn’, in Hindu Ethics: Purity, Abortion, and Euthanasia, (ed.) Coward, Harold G. (Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications, Indian Book Centre, 1989), pp. 4169Google Scholar. See also Wujastyk, Dagmar, Well-Mannered Medicine: Medical Ethics and Etiquette in Classical Ayurveda (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 143–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 Parry, Criminal Abortion, pp. 14–17. See generally Nelson, James B., ‘Protestant Attitudes toward Abortion’, in Abortion: A Reader, (ed.) Steffen, Lloyd H. (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1996), pp. 138–40Google Scholar and note 89.

17 Darmesteter, James (trans.), The Zend-Avesta: Part 1. The Vendîdâd (Oxford: Clarendon, 1880), pp. 174–5Google Scholar [Fargard XV, II (9-14)]; Skjærvø, Prods Oktor, The Spirit of Zoroastrianism (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2011), pp. 253–5Google Scholar; and S. K. Mendoza Forrest with Skjærvø, Prods Oktor, Witches, Whores, and Sorcerers: The Concept of Evil in Early Iran (Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 2011), pp. 80–2Google Scholar.

18 See Guha, ‘Unwanted Pregnancy’, p. 411; and Katz, Marion Holmes, ‘The Problem of Abortion in Classical Sunni fiqh’, in Islamic Ethics of Life: Abortion, War, and Euthanasia, (ed.) Brockopp, Jonathan E. (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 2003), pp. 30–1Google Scholar (noting differences of opinion within Shafei and Hanafi schools).

19 See Guha, ‘Unwanted Pregnancy’, pp. 425, 429; and Modi, J. P., A Textbook of Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology (Calcutta: Butterworth, 1929), p. 295Google Scholar.

20 See Wilkins, W. J., Modern Hinduism (Calcutta: Thacker, Spink, 1900), p. 168Google Scholar. Against this—and sustaining some pregnancies—was the popular belief that certain medicines and charms could change the sex of the fetus in utero. See Kaul, Harikishan, Census of India, 1911. Vol. XIV: Punjab. Part 1. Report (Lahore: Civil and Military Gazette Press, 1912), p. 234Google Scholar.

21 Rose, H. A., A Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North-West Frontier Province (Lahore: Government Printing, Punjab, 1911), p. 743Google Scholar.

22 See Waddell, L. A., Lyon's Medical Jurisprudence for India, with Illustrative Cases (Calcutta: Thacker, Spink, 1921), p. 315Google Scholar; and Nunan, William, Lectures in Medical Jurisprudence (Bombay: Taraporevala, 1925), p. 105Google Scholar. For a rare case of an Indian physician on trial for performing abortions in India, see in TI: ‘Dr. De Silva Committed’ (24 Jan. 1921), p. 6; and ‘A Doctor on Trial’ (10 Feb. 1921), p. 12.

23 See Kolsky, Elizabeth, Colonial Justice in British India: White Violence and the Rule of Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010)Google Scholar.

24 See Brookes, Abortion in England, p. 35; and in the TL: ‘Murder Verdict against a Doctor’ (27 Feb. 1920), p. 11; ‘Doctor Charged with Murders’ (15 April 1920), p. 5; and ‘Doctor Sentenced for Manslaughter’ (17 April 1920), p. 5. See also ‘Rejection of a Candidate under Rule 5. Case of M. B. Patel Who Was Charged with Procuring Abortion, and Released, the Grand Jury at the Central Criminal Court Ignoring the Bill’ (IOR/L/MIL/7/14142. File 321, no. 43).

25 See generally Forbes, Geraldine, ‘Managing Midwifery in India’, in Contesting Colonial Hegemony: State and Society in Africa and India, (eds) Engels, Dagmar and Marks, Shula (London: Academic Press, 1994), pp. 152–72Google Scholar; and Lang, Sean, ‘Drop the Demon Dai: Maternal Mortality and the State in Colonial Madras, 1840–1875’, Social History of Medicine, vol. 18, no. 3, 2005, pp. 363–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

26 Chevers, Norman, A Manual of Medical Jurisprudence for Bengal and the North-Western Provinces (Calcutta: F. Carbery, Bengal Military Orphan Press, 1856), p. 92Google Scholar. Ḍāyan (‘dain’) meant ‘witch’ in Hindustani. For a similar account, see ‘Nagpore’, The Pioneer (23 Jan. 1867), p. 5.

27 See Chevers, Manual, pp. 501–3; and ‘Law and Police: Fifth Criminal Sessions’, TI (21 Nov. 1879), p. 3.

28 Hehir and Gribble, Medical Jurisprudence (1929), pp. 655–6.

29 See generally Brown, T. E. B., Punjab Poisons, Being a Description of the Poisons Principally Used in the Punjab (Lahore: Civil and Military Gazette Press, 1883), pp. 203–7Google Scholar; Waddell, Lyon's Medical Jurisprudence, pp. 323–5; Nunan, Lectures, pp. 104–8; and Gibbons, J. B., A Manual of Medical Jurisprudence (Calcutta: G. W. Allen, 1904), pp. 351–8Google Scholar. On kneading, see Hehir and Gribble, Medical Jurisprudence (1929), p. 649; Chowdhury, ‘Delivering the “Murdered Child”’, p. 280; and Guha, ‘Unwanted Pregnancy’, p. 411.

30 See Hehir and Gribble, Medical Jurisprudence (1929), p. 649.

31 ‘Empress v. Templeton. Medical Report with an Analysis of the Post Mortem Report and Review of the Medical Evidence’, pp. 11–14, in ‘Hyderabad Abortion Case. Empress v. Templeton’ (IOR/R/1/1/1273), hereafter Hyderabad Abortion case papers.

32 Waddell, Lyon's Medical Jurisprudence, p. 324.

33 Arsenic was sometimes ingested or inserted directly into the vaginal canal. For two fatal cases, see Appendix I in Report of the Chemical Examiner to Government, Punjab, for 1924, p. iii; and, for 1925, p. i (IOR/V/24/419).

34 Riddle, John M., Eve's Herbs: A History of Contraception and Abortion in the West (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997), pp. 46, 58–9Google Scholar, 124, 254–5.

35 For instance, see Sommer, Matthew H., ‘Abortion in Late Imperial China: Routine Birth Control or Crisis Intervention?’, Late Imperial China, vol. 31, no. 2, 2010, pp. 128–9Google ScholarPubMed, 145–9.

36 Testimony of Mr T. (14 March 1929) in PCMC Suit No.3 of 1927 (T. v. T.), ‘The Parsee Chief Matrimonial Court. Judge's Notebook from 31 Jan. 1928 to 8 April 1929’, part 2, p. 157 (BHC). Potassium permanganate was the key ingredient in a well-known disinfectant solution patented as Condy's Fluid. See Modi, Textbook of Medical Jurisprudence, pp. 450–1.

37 See Reagan, Leslie J., When Abortion Was a Crime: Women, Medicine, and Law in the United States, 1867–1973 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997), p. 9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

38 Testimony of Mrs T. (7 March 1929) in Suit No.3 of 1927, part 2, p. 95.

39 In PCMC Suit No.3 of 1927 (part 2), see testimony of Dr Dara M. Dastur, p. 179, Lieut.-Col. Sorab Vajifdar, p. 181, and Major Shavax Byramji Mehta, p. 182 (all of 15 March 1929). See also testimony of Dr Minocher T. Anklesaria (18 March 1920), pp. 185–6, 191.

40 Testimony of Dastur, p. 178, S. Vajifdar, p. 181, and Mehta, p. 182, all in Suit No.3 of 1927 (part 2). See also reference to Mehta's claims in testimony of Anklesaria, p. 188.

41 Testimony of Anklesaria, pp. 185–91 and Nowroji J. Vajifdar (18 March 1929) in Suit No.3 of 1927 (part 2), pp. 191–2, both in Suit No.3 of 1927 (part 2).

42 See generally Hamlin, Christopher, ‘Scientific Method and Expert Witnessing: Victorian Perspectives on a Modern Problem’, Social Studies of Science, vol. 16, no. 3, 1986, pp. 485513CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Golan, Tal, ‘The History of Scientific Expert Testimony in the English Courtroom’, Science in Context, vol. 12, no. 1, 1999, pp. 732CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

43 Hehir and Gribble, Medical Jurisprudence (1929), p. 650. On the three-stick method, see Singh, ‘Modes of Inducing Criminal Abortion’, p. 9. On lāl citra, see Dymock, William, H. Warden, C. J., and Hooper, David, Pharmacographia Indica: A History of the Principal Drugs of Vegetable Origin, Met with in British India (Calcutta: Thacker, Spink, 1891), vol. 2, pp. 329–40Google Scholar; and Guha,‘Unwanted Pregnancy’, p. 409.

44 See Chevers, Manual, pp. 500–2; Waddell, Lyon's Medical Jurisprudence, p. 320; and the 1854 Sylhet case of Government v. Omoo Chung, Reports of Cases determined in the Court of Nizamut Adawlut for 1854 (Bengal), vol. 4, part 2, pp. 792–3.

45 Hodges, Sarah, Contraception, Colonialism and Commerce: Birth Control in South India, 1920–1940 (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008), p. 134Google Scholar. See also Appendix A.

46 Hehir and Gribble, Medical Jurisprudence (1929), p. 647.

47 See Parry, Criminal Abortion, pp. 134–5; Keown, John, Abortion, Doctors and the Law: Some Aspects of the Legal Regulation of Abortion in England from 1803 to 1982 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), pp. 2224CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 39–48; and McLaren, Angus, Reproductive Rituals: The Perception of Fertility in England from the Sixteenth Century to the Nineteenth Century (London: Methuen, 1984), pp. 117–19Google Scholar, 129–44. See also Mazzolini, Renato G., ‘Embryology’, in The Oxford Companion to the History of Modern Science, (ed.) Heilbron, J. L. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003)Google Scholar, n.p.; ‘Development’, in Dictionary of the History of Science, (eds) W. F. Bynum, E. J. Browne, and Roy Porter (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981), pp. 96–8; and O'Rahilly, Ronan, ‘One Hundred Years of Human Embryology’, Issues and Reviews in Teratology, vol. 4, 1988, pp. 83–9Google Scholar. Only in 1869 did Pope Pius IX declare that ensoulment occurred at conception, rather than at quickening, and that all abortion was murder in the eyes of the Catholic Church. See ‘Abortion’, in Encyclopedia of Birth Control, (ed.) Bullough, Vern L. (Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2001), p. 2Google Scholar.

48 Because abortion was a crime even before the IPC, it is inaccurate to say that the IPC criminalized abortion. There is some confusion in the scholarship on this point (for example, see Chowdhury, ‘Delivering the “Murdered Child”’, pp. 279–80).

49 Circular Order No.303 (31 Dec. 1824, probably in force in the North West Provinces) and Regulation XXII of 1816, s. 22, Regulation XXII of 1817, ss. 12–13; cited in Chevers, Manual, pp. 491, 507, emphasis in original.

50 Regulation XXII of 1816, ‘A Regulation for Re-Enacting and Reducing into One Regulation, with Amendments and Further Provisions, the Rules in Force for the Appointment and Maintenance of Chokeedars of Police’, s. 22, in Clarke, Richard, The Regulations of the Government of Fort William in Bengal, in Force at the End of 1853…Vol. II: Regulation from 1806 to 1834 (London: J. and H. Cox, 1854), p. 398.Google Scholar

51 See Appendix D. The IPC's anti-abortion provisions were less punitive than what would become law in England one year later.

52 Queen-Empress ILR Madras, vol. 9, 1886, pp. 369–71.

53 Mitra, Durba, ‘Sociological Description and the Forensics of Sexuality’, in Locating the Medical: Explorations in South Asian History, (eds) Roy, Rohan Deb and Attewell, Guy N. A. (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2018), pp. 35–9Google Scholar. There are signs that this approach began even before the IPC and Indian Police Act. See the 1856 case against Kanak bin Hurnak and others, Morris’ Cases disposed of by the Sudder Foujdaree Adawlut of Bombay (hereafter Morris’ SFA Reports), vol. 4, p. 788.

54 ‘Letter from Frederic Pincott Complaining of a Book Entitled Amrita Sagara which Contains a Paragraph on Inducing Abortion’, 22 March 1884 (IOR/L/PJ/6/120, file 565) and ‘Suppression of a Book on Domestic Medicine Named Amrita Sagara because it States the Various Ways in which Abortion or Miscarriage May Be Induced’, 22 March to 7 April 1884 (IOR/L/PJ/6/122, file 691).

55 Testimony of Dr Minocher T. Anklesaria in Suit No.3 of 1927, part 2, p. 190. See similarly Waddell, Lyon's Medical Jurisprudence, pp. 436–7.

56 Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act (IV of 1865), ss. 31–35. See also Rana, Framjee A., Parsi Law Embodying the Law of Marriage and Divorce and Inheritance and Succession Applicable to Parsis in British India (Bombay: A. B. Dubash at Jam-e-Jamshed Printing Works, 1934), pp. 6082Google Scholar. On Parsi matrimonial law and the PCMC, see Sharafi, Mitra, Law and Identity in Colonial South Asia: Parsi Legal Culture, 1772–1947 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014), pp. 165236CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

57 Testimony of Mrs T., Suit No.3 of 1927, part 2, pp. 69, 103. See also Appendix E.

58 ‘No.2. Notes of a Lecture Delivered by Colonel W. D. Sutherland M.D., I.M.S. Imperial Serologist, at the Detective Training School, Howrah, on the 6th of December 1917’, p. 1 (unpaginated) in Papers of Ormandy Ballantine Fane Sewell, 1902–23 (IOR/MSS Eur F419/8).

59 Charles H. Bedford, ‘Criminal Abortion in the Punjab’, Transactions of the Edinburgh Obstetrical Society, vol. 21, 1895–96, pp. 218–19. On the popular attribution of abortion-related fever and deaths to malaria, see Buchanan, W. J., ‘A Chapter on Medical Jurisprudence in India’, in The Principles and Practice of Medical Jurisprudence, (eds) Taylor, A. S. and Smith, Fred J. (London: J. and A. Churchill, 1905), vol. 2, p. 861Google Scholar.

60 Buchanan, ‘A Chapter’, p. 852. On civil surgeons, see Kolsky, Colonial Justice, pp. 134–5. On coroners’ inquests, see Appendix F. On chemical examiners, see Report of the Chemical Examiner to Government, Punjab, for the Year 1879 (IOR/V/24/418); and David Arnold, Toxic Histories: Poison and Pollution in Modern India (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016), pp. 111–17. On the imperial serologist, see Sharafi, Mitra, ‘The Imperial Serologist and Punitive Self-Harm: Bloodstains and Legal Pluralism in British India’, in Global Forensic Cultures: Making Fact and Justice in the Modern Era, (eds) Burney, Ian and Hamlin, Chris (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2019), pp. 6085Google Scholar.

61 For an abortion-related example, see Waddell, Lyon's Medical Jurisprudence, p. 327.

62 Report of the Chemical Examiner to Government, Punjab, for the Year 1931, p. 11 (IOR/V/24/420); and Arnold, Toxic Histories, pp. 109–10.

63 Bedford, ‘Criminal Abortion’, p. 205. For an example of a mineral poison detected in cremains, see Report of the Chemical Examiner to Government, Punjab, for the Year 1925, p. iii (IOR/V/24/419).

64 In The Indian Lancet, see untitled, vol. 8, no. 1, 1 July 1896, p. 47; and ‘Progress of Cremation’, vol. 9, no. 1, 1 January 1897, p. 39. See also John Glaister, Jr, ‘A Short History of Cremation’, pp. 5–11 (GUA FM/6/1/24), University of Glasgow Archives (Glasgow); and Laqueur, Thomas W., The Work of the Dead: A Cultural History of Mortal Remains (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2015), pp. 489548CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Burial remained the most common practice among Britons who died in India (Wilkinson, Theon, Two Monsoons: The Life and Death of Europeans in India (London: Duckworth, 1987), pp. 1898Google Scholar, 214–19).

65 On diseased cemeteries, see Jagannadhan, P. R. Hay, ‘Cremation and Burial’, Indian Medico-Chirurgical Review, vol. 3, no. 7, 1895, pp. 410–12Google Scholar; and Histories of Post-Mortem Contagion: Infectious Corpses and Contested Burials, (eds) Lynteris, Christos and Evans, Nicholas H. A. (Cham: Palgrave Macmilla, 2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On stacked gravesites, see ‘Our Cemeteries’, Rangoon Gazette Weekly Budget (8 Nov. 1889), p. 9; and Glaister, ‘A Short History’, p. 5.

66 Report of the Chemical Examiner Punjab for 1931, p. 12.

67 Similarly, see ‘Ahmedabad Doctor on Trial. Serious Charges. Woman's Mysterious Death’, TI (13 July 1931), p. 5.

68 See Forbes, Geraldine, Women in Modern India: The New Cambridge History of India IV.2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Sharafi, Law and Identity, pp. 167–8.

69 See Editorial, TI (21 Aug. 1884), p. 4; and Carroll, Lucy, ‘Law, Custom, and Statutory Social Reform: The Hindu Widows’ Remarriage Act of 1856’, in Women in Colonial India: Essays on Survival, Work and the State, (ed.) Krishnamurty, J. (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1989), p. 2Google Scholar. See also ‘Suicide of a Hindoo Widow at Calcutta’, TI (26 Oct. 1875), p. 3.

70 On child marriage, see Pande, Ishita, ‘Coming of Age: Law, Sex and Childhood in Late Colonial India’, Gender and History, vol. 24, no. 1, 2012, pp. 205–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Phulmoni's Body: The Autopsy, the Inquest and the Humanitarian Narrative on Child Rape in India’, South Asian History and Culture, vol. 4, no. 1, 2012, pp. 930Google Scholar.

71 Similarly, abortion was associated with Brahmin Kulinism. See Ward, William, A View of the History, Literature, and Mythology of the Hindoos, including a Minute Description of Their Manners and Customs, and Translations from Their Principal Works (London: Black, Kingsbury, Parbury, and Allen, 1820)Google Scholar, vol. 3, p. 82 at note x; and Karlekar, Malavika, ‘Kulin Widowhood in Nineteenth-Century Bengal: The Life and Times of Nistarini Debi’, in Engendering Law: Essays in Honour of Lotika Sarkar, (eds) Amita Dhanda and Archana Parashar (Lucknow: Eastern Book Company, 1999), pp. 257–74Google Scholar.

72 See Appendix C. On associations between abortion and Hindu widows, see Buchanan, ‘A Chapter’, p. 861; and Mitra, ‘Sociological Description’. Dalit and lower-caste communities neither practised child marriage nor condemned widow remarriage (Carroll, ‘Law’, p. 2).

73 ‘Mr. Thomas’, in Hamilton, William Robarts, The Indian Penal Code with Commentary (Calcutta: Thacker, Spink, 1895), p. 356Google Scholar.

74 ‘Petition of 312 Natives Subjects of India’, in ‘Further Papers (No. 20) Relative to the Bill to Remove All Legal Obstacles to the Marriage of Hindoo Widows’, all within ‘Report of the Select Committee on the Bill (and Other Documents)’, ‘To Remove All Legal Obstacles to the Marriage of Hindoo Widows’, Proceedings of the Legislative Council, 31 May 1856, Board's Collections’ (IOR/F/4/2691, no. 189069).

75 Untitled editorial, TI (19 Sept. 1885), p. 4.

76 M. R. Nilkanth, ‘Infant Marriage and Enforced Widowhood’, TI (14 Jan. 1885), p. 3.

77 Hehir, Patrick and Gribble, J. D. B., Outlines of Medical Jurisprudence for India (Madras: Higginbotham, 1892), pp. 268–9Google Scholar.

78 Waddell, Lyon's Medical Jurisprudence, p. 317; see also p. 276. Relatedly, see Hehir and Gribble, Medical Jurisprudence (1929), p. 648.

79 Coroner's Act (IV of 1871), s. 8. See Waddell, Lyon's Medical Jurisprudence, p. 6.

80 See Appendix F. On the coroner's surgeon, see ‘Death from Abortion’, TI (18 Feb. 1877), p. 3; and TI, ‘The Suspicious Death of a Hindoo Widow’ (15 Aug. 1892), p. 3.

81 Untitled article, Bombay Times and Journal of Commerce (7 July 1849), p. 456. Although this case occurred before the passage of the 1871 Coroner's Act, it involved an inquest. See Appendix F.

82 In TI, see ‘Death Suspected to be Caused by Abortion’ (8 April 1872), p. 3 on Abbai's case; and ‘Death from Abortion’ (19 Feb. 1877), p. 3 on Heerabai's case.

83 See Kolsky, Colonial Justice, pp. 108–19, 217–18; Raman, Bhavani, Document Raj: Writing and Scribes in Early Colonial South India (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012), pp. 137–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Schneider, Wendie Ellen, Engines of Truth: Producing Veracity in the Victorian Courtroom (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2015), pp. 103–42Google Scholar.

84 Kolsky, Elizabeth, ‘“The Body Evidencing the Crime”: Rape on Trial in Colonial India, 1860–1947’, Gender and History, vol. 22, no. 1, 2010, pp. 109–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mitra, Durba and Satish, Mrinal, ‘Testing Chastity, Evidencing Rape: Impact of Medical Jurisprudence on Rape Adjudication in India’, Economic and Political Weekly, vol. 49, no. 41 (11 Oct. 2014), pp. 51–8Google Scholar; and Baxi, Pratiksha, Public Secrets of Law: Rape Trials in India (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2014), pp. 61116Google Scholar.

85 ‘Mr. Thomas’ in Hamilton, IPC, p. 356. Similarly, see Chevers, Manual, pp. 491–2.

86 Macaulay in Hamilton, IPC, pp. 356–7. Similarly, see Beaufort, F. L., A Digest of the Criminal Law of the Presidency of Fort William … Part 1 (Calcutta: Thacker, Spink, 1857), p. 415Google Scholar.

87 Letter No.612 (4 April 1861) to J. P. Stratton, from [R. C. Shakespear, Agent Governor-General for Central India] and translation by Elizabeth Lhost of 1861 Urdu petition to the Political Assistant Agent for the Bundelkhand State; both in ‘Paldeo: Case of Reported Criminal Miscarriage at Paldeo’, Central India Agency, Baghelkhand 1861, Proc. No.884 (NAI). Although this case came from a princely state, the British Political Agent there had ‘the right to reserve for trial by himself all serious cases and such other cases as he may consider it advisable to deal with personally’ (Imperial Gazetteer of India. Vol. IX: Bomjur to Central India (Oxford: Clarendon, 1908), p. 76Google Scholar).

88 See ‘No. 2. Notes of a lecture … at the Detective Training School, Howrah’, p. 1; and Code of Criminal Procedure, s. 4, in Prinsep, H. T., The Code of Criminal Procedure (Act X of 1882) (Calcutta: Brown, 1882), pp. 42–3Google Scholar.

89 See Guha, ‘Unwanted Pregnancy’, p. 418.

90 ‘The Fourth Criminal Sessions’, TI (21 Sept. 1869), p. 4.

91 ‘The Police Court: A Disgraceful Case of Slander’, TI (16 June 1882), p. 3. On the law of defamation (criminal and civil) in British India, see Sharafi, Law and Identity, pp. 276–8.

92 Durba Mitra reports that some police in late nineteenth-century Bengal conducted genital examinations themselves at the local station, rather than delegating the task to a state-designated surgeon, as required by police procedure (Mitra, ‘Sociological Description’, p. 37). Undoubtedly, this practice was intended to be humiliating and punitive.

93 Queen-Empress v. Pudmon (1889) Unreported Criminal Cases of the High Court of Bombay, 1862–98, pp. 474–5.

94 Nathu Mal v. Abdul Haq All India Reporter 1930 Lahore, pp. 161–2.

95 Ibid., p. 163.

96 See Hehir and Gribble, Medical Jurisprudence (1929), pp. 649–50.

97 For possible veiled references, see Waddell, Lyon's Medical Jurisprudence, p. 315; and Hehir and Gribble, Medical Jurisprudence (1929), p. 645. Husbands also had extramarital relationships while their wives were away. Men who had contracted venereal disease during such separations sometimes committed suicide when their wives were due back (Waddell, Lyon's Medical Jurisprudence, p. 148). On imperial separations, see Buettner, Elizabeth, Empire Families: Britons and Late Imperial India (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), pp. 114–16Google Scholar. In addition to peacetime imperial separations, there were wartime ones. For example, see the 1920 case of Mabel Flora Murphy v. James Lloyd Murphy Bombay Law Reporter, vol. 22, pp. 1077–8.

98 A different pattern existed for ‘official’ hill stations, the summer working location for colonial administrators who shifted to specific hill stations like Simla or Darjeeling during the summer.

99 Sen, Indrani, Woman and Empire: Representations in the Writing of British India, 1858–1900 (Delhi: Orient Longman, 2002)Google Scholar. See also Sen, Indrani, ‘Gendering (Anglo) India: Rudyard Kipling and the Construction of Women’, Social Scientist, vol. 28, no. 9/10, 2000, pp. 1517CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

100 For popular historical accounts, see Macmillan, Margaret, Women of the Raj: The Mothers, Wives, and Daughters of the British Empire (New York: Random House, 2007), p. 145Google Scholar; and Crossette, Barbara, The Great Hill Stations of Asia (New York: Basic Books, 1999), p. 59Google Scholar.

101 As in English law, there was a presumption in Indian law that a child born to a married woman was ‘legitimate’ and the legal offspring of her husband (Indian Evidence Act 1872, s. 112). See Fink, Henry Raymond, The Indian Evidence Act (No. I of 1872) (Calcutta: Wyman, 1872), pp. 80–1Google Scholar; and Rattigan, H. A. B., The Law of Divorce Applicable to Christians in India (The Indian Divorce Act 1869) (London: Wildy and Sons, 1897), pp. 334–5Google Scholar.

102 See Keown, Abortion, Doctors and the Law; and Brookes, Abortion in England. Some physicians in Britain favoured making abortion more easily available during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (Keown, Abortion, Doctors and the Law, pp. 49–83).

103 On Arthur Templeton, see No. 72-C: From David Barr, Resident at Hyderabad, to Sec. to Government of India, Foreign Dept (30 Oct. 1903), in ‘Expulsion of Messrs. A. N. Templeton and E. Newton from the Hyderabad State’, Proceedings of the Foreign Dept, Nov. 1904 (IOR/R/1/1/307) and Examination of Eardley Norton (9 March 1897), in ‘Empress v. Templeton. Notes of the Hon. Sir Charles Farran, Kt., Chief Justice of Bombay’, p. 8, in Hyderabad Abortion case papers. On Marion Whittaker, see A. Templeton, ‘Hyderabad Abortion Case. Empress v. Templeton. Memorial to His Excellency the Viceroy and Governor General of India’ (18 Dec. 1897), p. 2, in Hyderabad Abortion case papers and ‘The Templeton Case’, TI (18 Jan. 1897), p. 3. On Hyderabad, see Beverley, Eric, Hyderabad, British India, and the World: Muslim Networks and Minor Sovereignty (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Sherman, Taylor, Muslim Belonging in Secular India: Negotiating Citizenship in Postcolonial Hyderabad (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

104 ‘Before A. Williams, Esq., Justice of the Peace and Magistrate, 1st Class, within His Highness the Nizam's Territories. Proceedings in Criminal Case No.1 of 1896. The Crown versus Arthur Napoleon Templeton’, p. 95, and Examination of Edward Lawrie (8 March 1897), in ‘Empress v. Templeton. Notes of Farran’, p. 3, both in Hyderabad Abortion case papers. The proposal to send Mrs Whittaker's uterus to the chemical analyser in Bombay was rejected due to chain-of-custody concerns. Instead, Lawrie took the organ with him to the United States of America for analysis. This examination confirmed that an abortion had taken place (‘Examination of Accused, Crown vs. Templeton’ (12 or 22 Jan. 1897), in Proceedings in Criminal Case No.1 of 1896, p. 90, and Templeton, ‘Memorial’, p. 41, both in Hyderabad Abortion case papers).

105 On quinine, compare Nunan, Lectures, p. 107, and Gibbons, Manual, p. 357. Edith Whittaker may also have taken ergot and patent pills like Carter's Liver Pills, Cockles’ and Beecham's pills (Examination of Patrick Hehir (19 Dec. 1896), in ‘Exhibit A: Inquest Proceedings held before Rao Bahadur B. K. Joshi, Superintendent of the Residency Bazars, Hyderabad’, p. 7 and Examination of Patrick Hehir (9 March 1897), in ‘Empress v. Templeton. Notes of Farran’, p. 10, both in Hyderabad Abortion case papers).

106 ‘Before A. Williams … Proceedings in Crim. Case No.1 of 1896’, p. 95, and Templeton, ‘Memorial’, pp. 2–3, both in Hyderabad Abortion case papers.

107 Foreign Dept note (undated) signed [S. J. B.], p. 13 (handwritten pagination) and ‘Charge by A. Williams, J.P. and Magistrate, Residency Hyderabad’ (26 Jan. 1897), pp. 465–8 (handwritten pagination), both in Hyderabad Abortion case papers.

108 Inquest proceedings were held before B. K. Joshi, Superintendent of the Residency Bazars, Hyderabad. Joshi was one of three South Asian adjudicators involved in the case. The others were Justice Badruddin Tyabji of the Bombay High Court and M. R. Dastur, Assistant Cantonment Magistrate in the District Court of Secunderabad. See Templeton v. Laurie and others ILR Bombay vol. 25, 1901, pp. 240–2; ‘The Templeton Case’, TI (20 Feb. 1901), p. 5; and ‘The Templeton Case: Full Text of the Judgment’, TI (16 April 1901), p. 6.

109 The magistrate did not rule on Templeton's guilt. Rather, he refused to dismiss the complaint (under the Code of Criminal Procedure, s. 203), finding that there were sufficient grounds for proceeding to a full trial.

110 Templeton's jury consisted of eight Britons and two South Asians (one Parsi and one Baghdadi Jewish juror) (‘Law and Police. First Criminal Sessions—Monday’, TI (9 March 1897), p. 3; and ‘Law and Police: First Criminal Sessions—Tuesday’, TI (10 March 1897), p. 3). On the special jury, see Sharafi, Law and Identity, p. 199. Although the Madras High Court would have been geographically closer, Templeton's criminal case went to the Bombay High Court at his own request (Templeton, ‘Memorial’, p. 2, in Hyderabad Abortion case papers; see also ‘The Templeton Case: Full Text of the Judgment’).

111 See ‘Government of India: Legislative Dept. The Foreign Jurisdiction and Extradition Act 1879 and the Extradition (India) Act 1895’ (Calcutta: Office of the Superintendent of Government Printing, 1897), pp. 23–25, 51; Hamilton, IPC, p. 9; and Saksena, Priyasha, ‘Jousting over Jurisdiction: Sovereignty and International Law in Late Nineteenth-Century South Asia’, Law and History Review, 2019, pp. 149Google Scholar. On extraterritoriality elsewhere in Asia, see Chen, Li, Chinese Law in Imperial Eyes: Sovereignty, Justice, and Transcultural Politics (New York: Columbia University Press, 2016)Google Scholar.

112 On inconsistencies in Hehir's testimony, see Templeton, ‘Memorial’, pp. 15–16, in Hyderabad Abortion case papers.

113 Lawrie, Edward and Hehir, Patrick, Medicine and Surgery for India (Calcutta: Thacker, Spink, 1891)Google Scholar; and Gribble, D. B. and Hehir, Patrick, Outlines of Medical Jurisprudence for India (Madras: Higginbotham, 1893)Google Scholar, dedication page.

114 Note by [J. C.] (8 June 1897), Adjutant General's Department, pp. 11–13, Note by [J. P. H.] (29 June 1897) and by James Cleghorn, Director-General, IMS (5 Aug. 1897), Home Department, pp. 15–16, 19–22, all in ‘Conduct of Surgeon Captain P. Hehir’ (IOR/R/1/1/1266).

115 ‘Conduct of Surg. Capt. Hehir in Connection with the Templeton Case at Hyderabad’, unofficial reference, Home Dept (3 April 1897), p. 4, in ‘Conduct of Surgeon Captain P. Hehir’ (IOR/R/1/1/1266). On Hehir's return to India, see untitled, Indian Lancet, vol. 10, no. 4 (16 Aug. 1897), pp. 196, and no. 5 (1 Sept. 1897), p. 249, as well as Gribble, J. D. B. and Hehir, Patrick, Outlines of Medical Jurisprudence for India (Madras: Higginbotham, 1898)Google Scholar, preface to 4th edition.

116 See examination of Edward Lawrie (undated), pp. 486–7 (handwritten pagination) in Hyderabad Abortion case papers; Chakrabarti, Pratik, Bacteriology in British India: Laboratory Medicine and the Tropics (Rochester, NY: University of Rochester, 2012)Google Scholar; and Arnold, Toxic Histories, pp. 168–70.

117 ‘The Templeton Case’, TI (11 Jan. 1897), p. 5. See also ‘Witness No.2 for Prosecution: Patrick Hehir’ (8 Jan. 1897), in ‘Before A. Williams … Proceedings in Criminal Case No.1 of 1896’, pp. 26–8, Examination of Patrick Hehir (9 March 1897), in ‘Empress v. Templeton. Notes of Farran’, pp. 12–13, and Examination of Patrick Hehir (undated), pp. 496–9 (handwritten pagination), all in Hyderabad Abortion case papers.

118 Templeton, ‘Memorial’, p. 27, in Hyderabad Abortion case papers.

119 ‘In the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction. Suit No.390 of 1896’ (Templeton v. Laurie, Hehir, and d'Costa), pp. 460–1 (handwritten pagination), in Hyderabad Abortion case papers, Templeton v. Laurie, p. 234, and ‘In the District Court of Secunderabad. Civil Suit No.171 of 1900’ (Templeton v. Lawrie, Hehir, and D'Costa), p. 2, in ‘Advance of Rs. 25,000 Made by the Hyderabad State to Lt. Col. Lawrie, Residency Surgeon, for the Defense of the Suit Brought against Him by Mr. Templeton. Acceptance by the Nizam's Government of the Liability to Bear the Costs’ (IOR/R/1/1/1276).

120 Examination of William Owen Wolseley (9 March 1897), in ‘Empress v. Templeton. Notes of Farran’, p. 6, in Hyderabad Abortion case papers.

121 Templeton, ‘Memorial’, p. 10, in Hyderabad Abortion case papers.

122 Templeton, ‘Memorial’, p. 15, in Hyderabad Abortion case papers. See generally Robbins, Kenneth X. and McLeod, John, African Elites in India: Habshi Amarat (Ahmedabad: Mapin, 2006)Google Scholar; and India in Africa, Africa in India: Indian Ocean Cosmopolitanisms, (ed.) Hawley, John C. (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2008)Google Scholar.

123 ‘The Mysterious Case at Hyderabad’, TI (14 Jan. 1897), p. 6; and Templeton, ‘Memorial’, p. 18, in Hyderabad Abortion case papers. The daily fee of the barrister, Eardley Norton (Rs 800) was 80 per cent of Hehir's monthly salary of Rs 1,000 (Examination of Patrick Hehir (10 March 1897), p. 506 (handwritten pagination), in Hyderabad Abortion case papers). Incidentally, the deceased had worked for the Norton family, first as a maid and then as a lady's companion, shorthand writer, and typist at the age of 19–20 (Examination of A. Templeton (20 Dec. 1896), in ‘Exhibit A’, p. 12, in Hyderabad Abortion case papers; and ‘Law and Police. First Criminal Sessions—Tuesday’, p. 3). Templeton covered the cost of Edith Whittaker's cemetery plot, but Eardley Norton paid for her tombstone (‘Appendix No. II. Statement of G. H. Taylor, Sexton of St. George's Cemetery’, in ‘Appendix Containing Enclosures I to XIII’, p. 2, in Hyderabad Abortion case papers).

124 Templeton, ‘Memorial’, p. 19, in Hyderabad Abortion case papers.

125 See examination of William Owen Wolesley (8 Jan. 1897), ‘Before A. Williams … Proceedings in Crim. Case No.1 of 1896’, p. 21, ‘Empress v. Templeton. Medical Report’, pp. 9–10, and Templeton, ‘Memorial’, p. 44, all in Hyderabad Abortion case papers. On malpraxis, see Hehir and Gribble, Medical Jurisprudence (1929), pp. 339–41, 357–9; Waddell, Lyon's Medical Jurisprudence, pp. 437–9; Modi, Textbook of Medical Jurisprudence, pp. 387–8; (Lieut.-Col.) V. N. Whitamore v. R. N. Rao All India Reporter 1935 Lahore, pp. 247–50; and Mehta, Homi Shapurji, Medical Law and Ethics in India (London: Macmillan, 1963), p. 177Google Scholar (on the unreported 1946 Bombay High Court case of Amelia Flounders v. Dr. Clement Pereira). For potentially applicable criminal law, see IPC, ss. 52, 80–81, 88, 90–91, 92, 304A.

126 Masonic lodges had their own arbitration committees for disputes between members. Templeton in fact served on his lodge's version in 1903 (Gribble, J. D. B., History of Freemasonry in Hyderabad (Deccan) (Madras: Higginbotham, 1910), p. 224Google Scholar)).

127 ‘Memorandum’ (undated), p. 36, in ‘Conduct of Hehir’, ‘Before A. Williams … Proc. in Crim. Case No.1 of 1896’, p. 94, in Hyderabad Abortion case papers. Hehir's chapter on abortion did not discuss quinine.

128 Examination of Patrick Hehir (undated), p. 488 (handwritten pagination), and Templeton, ‘Memorial’, pp. 1–2, 8, 18, 36, both in Hyderabad Abortion case papers.

129 Templeton, ‘Memorial’, p. 7, Witness No.17 for the Prosecution: Samuel Henry Johnston, Chaplain, St. George's Church, p. 70 and ‘Order by A. Williams’, pp. 76–7, both in ‘Before A. Williams … Proceedings in Crim. Case No.1 of 1896’, Appendices No. I–III in ‘Appendix Containing Enclosures I to XIII’, pp. 1–7, all in Hyderabad Abortion case papers.

130 See Templeton v. Laurie, p. 232; ‘The Mysterious Occurrence in Secunderabad’, TI (12 Jan. 1897), p. 5; ‘The Mysterious Case at Hyderabad’, TI (12 Jan. 1897), p. 3; and examination of Patrick Hehir (10 March 1897), ‘Empress v. Templeton. Notes of Farran’, p. 16, in Hyderabad Abortion case papers.

131 Templeton v. Laurie, p. 236; and ‘The Templeton Case Sequel: Decision of the High Court’, TI (23 Jan. 1900), p. 3. British Indian courts had no civil jurisdiction over a case involving British European subjects in a princely state. See Saksena, ‘Jousting over Jurisdiction’.

132 This British Indian court was in the Secunderabad Cantonment and was not part of the Nizam's legal system. On this case, see ‘The Templeton Case’ (20 Feb. 1901), ‘The Templeton Case. Full Text of Judgment’, ‘Rejection of an Application from Lieut. Col. E. Lawrie’ (IOR/R/1/1/1274), and ‘Advance of Rs 25,000 Made by the Hyderabad State to Lt. Col. Lawrie, Residency Surgeon for the Defence of the Suit Brought against Him by Mr. Templeton. Acceptance by the Nizam's Government of the Liability to Bear the Cost’ (1901–02) (IOR/R/1/1/1276).

133 G.M. (1 June 1897), ‘Precis, Notes and Orders’ from Army Headquarters, India (Medical Division), in ‘Conduct of Surgeon Captain P. Hehir’, p. 8 (IOR/R/1/1/1266).

134 See ‘The Chloroform Commission’, TI (10 Jan. 1890), p. 5; and ‘Nomination of Col. P. Hehir, Indian Medical Service, to Represent Government of India at International Commission for Securing Uniformity in Military Health Statistics and Colours of Tallies to Be Attached to Men Wounded in Action’, 1912–13 (IOR/L/MIL/7/12355).

135 Letter from Hyderabad official (name illegible) to T. Chichele-Plowden, Resident at Hyderabad (Hyderabad, 12 March 1892), p. 8, in ‘Retention by Hyderabad State of the Service for Surgeon Capt. P. Hehir MD for the Further Period of Five Years’, Foreign: General, June 1892, Part B, Proceedings No. 290-2, Aug. 1892 (NAI).

136 ‘Enquiry by the Secretary of State for India, in Connection with the Promotion of Lieut.-Col. P. Hehir, IMS, to the Rank of Colonel which Led to the Supercession of Certain Officers’, Home: Medical, Proceedings No.116, July 1913 (NAI).

137 ‘Promotion of Brigadier-General Patrick Hehir to K.C.S.I. on 1 Jan. 1920’, Foreign and Political: Internal, Proceedings No.310, Dec. 1920 (NAI). See also Appendix G.

138 Note by Lord Curzon (23 Dec. 1903), p. 3, in ‘Expulsion of Templeton and Newton’.

139 Similarly, see Ian Burney, ‘A Poisoning of No Substance: The Trials of Medico-Legal Proof in Mid-Victorian England’, Journal of British Studies, vol. 38, no. 1, 1999, pp. 86–92.

140 Hippocratic oath in Hehir and Gribble, Medical Jurisprudence (1929), p. 347, emphasis in original.

141 Hehir and Gribble, Medical Jurisprudence (1929), p. 347.

142 Ibid., pp. 353–4; see also pp. 349–51; and Waddell, Lyon's Medical Jurisprudence, pp. 16–17, 434–7.

143 ‘I shall never recommend means to procure abortion, but will live and practice chastely and religiously’ (Waddell, Lyon's Medical Jurisprudence, p. 434). For a narrower translation, see Jones, W. H. S., The Doctor's Oath: An Essay in the History of Medicine (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1924), p. 31Google Scholar (‘Nor will I contemplate administering any pessary which may cause abortion’).

144 Rolleston, H. D., ‘William Smoult Playfair’, in Dictionary of National Biography, (ed.) Sidney Lee (London: Smith, Elder, 1912), vol. 3, p. 120Google Scholar. Playfair's father was Playfair, George, Inspector-General of Hospitals in Bengal and translator of The Taleef Shereef, or Indian Materia Medica, Translated from the Original (Calcutta: Medical and Physical Society of Calcutta, 1833)Google Scholar.

145 ‘The Obligation of Professional Secrecy’, BMJ, no. 1840 (4 April 1896), p. 861. The BMJ editors felt that Playfair had been harshly treated (p. 862). See further Appendix H.

146 Letter from E. Lawrie, Residency Surgeon, Hyderabad, to the First Assistant Resident, Hyderabad (10 Jan. 1898), pp. 9–11, in ‘Request of Surg. Lt. Col. E. Lawrie that the Views of the Government of India on His Confidential Report on Surg. Capt. P. Hehir May Be Reconsidered’ (IOR/R/1/1/1267).

147 Contrast with the 1918 edition of Lyon's medico-legal treatise (edited by Waddell), cited in Hehir and Gribble, Medical Jurisprudence (1929), p. 349.

148 See Maehle, Holger, Contesting Medical Confidentiality: Origins of the Debate in the United States, Britain, and Germany (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2016), pp. 811CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Ferguson, Angus H., Should A Doctor Tell? The Evolution of Medical Confidentiality in Britain (Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate, 2013)Google Scholar.

149 Ferguson, Should A Doctor Tell?, p. 4; and, on the debate in the VD context, see ibid., pp. 53–153; and Mehta, Medical Law and Ethics, pp. 81–2.

150 See Ferguson, Angus H., ‘Speaking Out about Staying Silent: An Historical Examination of Medico-Legal Debates over the Boundaries of Medical Confidentiality’, in Lawyers’ Medicine: The Legislature, the Courts and Medical Practice, 1760–2000, (eds) Goold, Imogen and Kelly, Catherine (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2009), pp. 99124Google Scholar.

151 See Hehir, Patrick and Gribble, J. D. B., Outlines of Medical Jurisprudence for India (Madras: Higginbotham, 1908), p. xiiGoogle Scholar.

152 Hehir and Gribble, Medical Jurisprudence (1929), pp. vi–vii.

153 ‘Mr. B. V. Jadhav's Bill to Amend Section 312 of the Indian Penal Code to Provide that Miscarriage Caused by a Medical Practitioner Is Not Punishable in Certain Circumstances’, Home Dept: Judicial Branch, 1933, Proceedings no. 603 (NAI). On abortion in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, see Parry, Criminal Abortion, pp. 19–21; and Brookes, Abortion in England, pp. 58–9.

154 For a similar suggestion, see Singha, Radhika, A Despotism of Law: Crime and Justice in Early Colonial India (Delhi: Oxford University Press), pp. 57–8Google Scholar. Many abortion-related cases in S. Guha's study involved sex with relatives, especially in-laws (Guha, ‘Unwanted Pregnancy’, p. 432). Similarly, see Sommer, ‘Abortion in Late Imperial China’, p. 126.

155 Interwar Calcutta was a hub for physician-supervised abortions, although the cost was prohibitive for many women (Guha, ‘Unwanted Pregnancy’, pp. 434–5).

156 Under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act of 1971 (s. 3), abortion is legal if a physician determines that a pregnancy would cause ‘grave injury’ to a woman's ‘physical or mental health’ or if the resulting child would be ‘seriously handicapped’.

157 For examples, see Oberman, Michelle, Her Body, Our Laws: On the Front Lines of the Abortion War from El Salvador to Oklahoma (Boston: Beacon Press)Google Scholar; Thomson, The Fijians, pp. 222–7; and Menon, P. K., ‘The Law of Abortion with Special Reference to the Commonwealth Caribbean’, Anglo-American Law Review, vol. 5, 1976, pp. 343–4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

158 Kalantry, Sital, Women's Human Rights and Migration: Sex-Selective Abortion Laws in the United States and India (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 2017), pp. 140–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

1
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Abortion in South Asia, 1860–1947: A medico-legal history
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Abortion in South Asia, 1860–1947: A medico-legal history
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Abortion in South Asia, 1860–1947: A medico-legal history
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *