The Sheppard-Towner Act: Progressivism in the 1920s
Author(s): J. Stanley Lemons
Reviewed work(s):
Source: The Journal of American History, Vol. 55, No. 4 (Mar., 1969), pp. 776-786
Published by: Organization of American Historians
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1900152 .
Accessed: 31/01/2013 12:20
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Organization of American Historians is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
The Journal of American History.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded on Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:20:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TheSheppard-Towner
Act:
in the1920s
Progressivism
J. STANLEYLEMONS
intosocialsecurity
THE firstventureof thefederalgovernment
legisla-
actof 1921
and infancy
tion-the Sheppard-Towner
maternity
protection
of proaboutthepersistence
-has beengenerally
ignoredin discussions
billwas a linkin a chainof ideas
in the 1920s.1The maternity
gressivism
and actionsfromRooseveltto Roosevelt,whichbeganwiththe White
on ChildWelfareStandards
in 1909 andendedwiththe
HouseConference
Actwasthe
Actof 1935. In addition,
theSheppard-Towner
SocialSecurity
first
majordividendofthefullenfranchisement
ofwomen.Women'sorgaof thebillandlaterfought
nizations
helpedto forcetheenactment
to preserveit fromrepeal.Althoughpassedin thefirst
yearof theHardingaditwasa product
oftheprogressive
movement.
ministration,
BureaudevelopedfromtheWhiteHouse
The UnitedStatesChildren's
in 1909, and theBureau'sfirst
Conference
wereinto
majorinvestigations
thecausesof infantand maternal
The studiesrevealedthatthe
mortality.
nationhad unusuallyhighrates.For example,in 1918 it rankedsevenand eleventhin infantmortality.
teenthin maternal
The Bureaufounda
correlation
between
andthemortality
poverty
rate.Forfamilies
earning
less
than$450 annually,
one babyin six diedwithinthefirst
year;fortheincomerangeof $650-$850annually,
theratewas one in ten;and forthose
earningabout$1,250annually,
theratewas one in sixteen.Eventhelatter
ratecompared
unfavorably
to theaverageof a nationlikeNew Zealand,
Mr. Lemonsis assistantprofessorof historyin Rhode Island College.
1 General
of the 1920s fail to mentiontheSheppard-Towner
treatments
Act: Eric Goldman,
Rendezvous with Destiny: A History of Modern AmericanReform (New York, 1952);
John D. Hicks, Republican Ascendancy,1921-1933 (New York, 1960); William E.
Leuchtenburg,
The Perils of Prosperity,
1914-1932 (Chicago, 1958); ArthurM. Schlesinger,
Jr.,The Crisis of the Old Order: 1919-1933 (Boston, 1957); RichardHofstadter,Age of
Reform:From Bryanto F.D.R. (New York, 1955). More specialized studies have almost
neglectedthemeasure:ClarkeA. Chambers,Seedtimeof Reform:AmericanSocial Serviceand
Social Action, 1918-1933 (Minneapolis, 1963); Roy Lubove, The Strugglefor Social Securityin America,1900-1935 (Cambridge, 1968). The most extensivetreatmentis in James
G. Burrow,AMA: Voice of AmericanMedicine (Baltimore,1963), 161-64.
*776a
This content downloaded on Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:20:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
The Sheppard-Towner
Act
777
whichhad a thorough
program
of careand an infantdeathrateof one in
twenty-one.
The studiesfoundthat80 percentof America'sexpectant
no adviceortrainedcare.2To remedy
mothers
received
thissituation,
JeannetteRankin,whowas thefirst
womanto servein Congress,
introduced
in
1918 a measurewhichwas to providepublicprotection
of maternity
and
It had been sponsoredbyJuliaLathrop,chiefof theChildren's
infancy.
Bureau.DemocraticSenatorMorrisSheppardof Texas and Republican
Congressman
HoraceTownerof Iowa reintroduced
thebill in theSixtysixthCongress.Littleprogress
was madetowarditspassageuntilthefull
ofwomenin 1920.
enfranchisement
The NationalLeagueofWomenVoters,thedirectoffspring
oftheleadingwomansuffrage
association,
urgedthenationalparties
toapproveofthe
maternity
bill in their1920 platforms.
The Democratic,
Socialist,
Prohibition,and Farmer-Labor
partiesendorsed
theproposal;theRepublican
platformignoredit,butWarrenG. Hardingcameoutsquarely
foritin hisSocialJustice
DayspeechonOctober1, 1920.
Hardingcalleda specialsessionto begintheSixty-seventh
Congress,
but
reformers
fearedthatthe Sheppard-Towner
bill mightbe ignoredin the
pressto deal withtariff
and budgetmatters.
TheyurgedthePresident
to
singleoutthebill forpassagein hismessageto Congress,
butHardingrespondedwitha one-sentence
endorsement:
"I assumethematernity
bill,alreadystrongly
approved,
willbe enactedpromptly,
thusaddingto ourmanifestation
of humaninterest."3
Sheppardand Townerresubmitted
thebill
in April;it passedtheSenateon July22, 1921,bya voteof 63 to 7. But
themeasureseemeddestinedto perishin theHouse Committee
on InterstateandForeignCommerce,
whosechairman,
SamuelWinslow,wasan ardentanti-suffragist.
Formonths
he refused
evento holdhearings;
andonly
afterwomenwhowereinfluential
in theRepublican
party,
suchas Harriet
Taylor Upton, vice-chairman
of the RepublicanNational Committee,
warnedHardingthatthe delaywas alienating
womendid thePresident
prodWinslowintoaction.4
Harding'sendorsement
of thisbillwas importantbecausemanymembers
of Congressnotonlyopposedthis"newfad
2Senate Report, 66 Cong., 2 Sess., No. 650, pp. 7-8; Reports of the Dept. of Labor,
1918, Report of the Secretaryof Labor and Reports of the Bureaus (Washington, 1919),
183-88; Reportsof the Dept. of Labor, 1920, Reportof the Secretaryof Labor and Reports
of the Bureaus (Washington, 1921), 177-79; Sylvia Hardy, "The Children'sYear," Life
and Labor, VIII (July 1918), 139-40; Mary SumnerBoyd, "Let's Stop, Now, the Casualties
of Motherhood,"Good Housekeeping,LXXI (Dec. 1920), 43.
3Women's Committeeon Sheppard-TownerBill to Warren G. Harding,March 5, 1921,
Box 157, folder117-1; Address to Congress,April 13, 1921, Box 773, folder 1921, Warren
G. HardingPapers (Ohio HistoricalSociety,Columbus,Ohio).
'Harriet Taylor Upton to George B. Christian,May 31, 1921; Upton to Harding,June18,
1921; Upton to Harding,July30, 1921; Harlean Jamesto Harding,May 17, 1921; James
to Christian,May 30, 1921, Box 157, folder117-1,ibid.
This content downloaded on Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:20:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
778
The Journal
of American
History
appropriation"
butalso fearedtheunknown
powerof thewomen'svote.
evadedtheprotests
ofthearousedmedicalprofession
Andmembers
bysaying: "I am an organization
and awaitinstructions."5
Whenthe
republican
House finally
theonly
voted,thebill passedeasily279 to 39. Ironically,
womanmemberin Congress,the anti-suffragist
Alice Robertson,
voted
againstit.Hardingsignedthemeasure
onNovember
23, 1921.
A principalforcemovingCongresswas fearof beingpunishedat the
polls.The women'svotewas an unknown
at thetime.For years,
quantity
thesuffragists
hadpromised
tocleanhousewhentheygotthevote,andthey
claimedthatwomenwouldbe issueoriented
rather
thanpartyoriented.
Politiciansfearedthatwomenvoterswouldcasta bloc voteor remainaloof
fromtheregularparties.The leadersof themajorwomen'sorganizations
hopedto mobilizethefemalevoteforreform.
Passageofthematernity
bill
was thefirst
goalof thenewlyenfranchised
women,andittookprecedence
overall otherefforts.
In 1920,theLeagueofWomenVotershelpedtocreate theWomen'sJointCongressional
Committee
(WJCC), whichcoordinatedlobbyingactivities
in Washingtonfor nearlytwo dozen national
women'sorganizations
andclaimedto speakfor20,000,000members.
The
WJCClobbiedvigorously,
whiletheconstituent
organizations
drummed
up
grassrootssupport
anddelugedCongress
witha torrent
ofletters,
telegrams,
andpersonaldelegations.
If a womanreadanyofthemasscirculation
women's magazines-Good Housekeeping,PictorialReview, McCall's, Woman's Home Companion,or Delineator-she was exposed to manyarticles
whichfavored
theSheppard-Towner
bill.
FlorenceKelley,executive
secretary
of theNationalConsumers'
League,
chairedthesubcommittee
of theWJCCwhichworkedfortheenactment
of
themeasure.She latersaid: "Of all theactivities
in whichI haveshared
duringmorethanforty
yearsof striving,
noneis, I am convinced,
of such
fundamental
as theSheppard-Towner
importance
Act."6Testifying
before
shesuggested
Congress,
thatif Congressrefused
to passthebill it would,
likeKingHerod,condemn
infants
to death."Whatanswercanbe givento
thewomenin a myriadof organizations,
who are marveling
and asking,
wishwomenandchildren
'WhydoesCongress
to die?'"7 Pressing
forpassage of thebill,hersubcommittee
interviewed
congressmen
at therateof
5"The Senate Discusses the 'MaternityBill,'" Capital Eye, I (Oct. 1921), 4; "News
Notes of the Fortnight,"Woman Citizen,VI (July 30, 1921), 6; Clipping fromIllinois
Medical Journal (Sept. 1921), enclosed in E. ForrestHerdien, M.D., to Harding, Sept.
9, 1921, Box 157, folder117-1,HardingPapers.
'Quoted in JosephineGoldmark,ImpatientCrusader: FlorenceKelley's Life Story (Urbana, 1953), 93.
7House, Public Protectionof Maternityand Infancy,Hearings on H. R. 10925 beforethe
Committeeon Interstateand Foreign Commerce,66 Cong., 3 Sess. (Dec. 20-29, 1920), 29.
This content downloaded on Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:20:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Act
The Sheppard-Towner
779
fifty
per day. The resultwas a handsomemarginand full creditfrom
MedicalAssociation,
friendsand foesalike.The Journalof theAmerican
whichhad strongly
opposedthebill,statedthatthelobbyforthemeasure
lobbiesthathaseverbeenseenin Washington."
was "one of thestrongest
thattheyweretoldthatif theyvotedagainstthe
Congressmen
reported
wouldvoteagainstthemin thenext
measureeverywomanin theirdistrict
saythatthelobbyin
election."Membersof Congressof years'experience
thathad everinfavorof the bill was themostpowerfuland persistent
of thebill,
vadedWashington.'"8SenatorWilliamS. Kenyon,a supporter
couldhavevoted
of thelobby:"If themembers
confirmed
theeffectiveness
in theircloakroomsit wouldhavebeenkilledas
on thatmeasuresecretly
of the
emphatically
as it was finally
passedin theopenunderthepressure
ofWomen."9
JointCongressional
Committee
and infant
AlthoughtheChildren's
Bureauhad revealedhighmaternal
of theSheppard-Towner
bill,
deathratesand despitethemodestcharacter
of thenation.
themeasurewas assailedas a threatto theveryinstitutions
conopposedit.Extreme
Becausesuffragists
favored
thebill,anti-suffragists
conspiracy
against
servatives
condemned
theplan as partof a Bolshevist
of
theintegrity
America.Statesrightsadvocatesallegedthatit threatened
thestates.Finally,thebill was caughtin thecrossfirebetweentheAmerican MedicalAssociation
of quackmedicalcultists.
Shepand a collection
to catchthe
pard-Towner
was one of thefirst
piecesof federallegislation
bruntof theAMA's newfearof statemedicine.
The arguments
advanced
at thetimeof theoriginaldebateandpassageofthemeabytheopponents
surewererepeatedwhentheproposalcameup forrenewalin 1926 andin
1929.
The principal
of thetheory
billwas
advocates
thattheSheppard-Towner
a communist
Opposedto Woman
invention
weretheNationalAssociation
theyhadmaintained
Suffrage
anditslegacy,theWomanPatriots.
Foryears,
andcommuthatfeminism
andwomansuffrage
werethesameas socialism
wroteHardinga six-page
nism.MaryKilbreth,
a leadinganti-suffragist,
letterwhichcondemned
forward
his signingof thebill. "It is notbrought
butby thepropagandaof a
by the combinedwisdomof all Americans,
self-interested
Bloc." "Therearemany
bureauassociated
withtheFeminist
loyalAmerican
menand women,"shewarned,"whobelievethatthisbill,
and backedby the
inspiredby foreignexperiments
in Communism,
radical forcesin this country,
strikesat the heartof our American
8Journalof theAmerican
MedicalAssociation,
77 (Dec. 10, 1921), 1913-14;ibid.,78
(Feb. 11, 1922), 434.
9 Quoted by CharlesA. Selden, "The Most PowerfulLobbyin Washington,"Ladies' Home
Journal,
XXXIX (April1922), 95.
This content downloaded on Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:20:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
780
The Journalof AmericanHistory
civilization...."10The Woman'sMunicipalLeagueofBoston,theAmerican Constitutional
League,theConstitutional
Liberty
Leagueof Massachusetts,and theMassachusetts
PublicInterests
Leagueagreed.SenatorJames
ReedofMissouriechoedKilbreth's
thatthebillwas
wordswhenhe charged
communist
inspiredand thatthe standards
drawnup by the Children's
Bureauweremadebycrackpots."'
Certain"medicalliberty"
organizations
(theyopposedanystateregulationin medicine:vaccination,
theWasserman
of
quarantine,
test,licensing
doctors,
medical
the
hospitals,
and
schools)viewed Sheppard-Towner
Act
as another
brickin thewallbeingerected
bytheregular
medicalprofession
to eliminate
all butorthodox
practices.'2
Butthemostsignificant
opposition
to the bill came fromphysicians
who expressedthemselves
the
through
AmericanMedicalAssociation.
The AMA had marched
withinthebroad
ranksof progressivism
from1900 to WorldWar I and vigorously
campaignedforpurefoodand drugs,protection
of thepublicfrommedical
a federaldepartment
quackery,
of health,andtheelevation
of standards
in
medicalpracticeand education.'Nevertheless,
theAMA had alwaysbeen
silenton othergreathealthproblems:
slumsandtenements,
factory
hazards,
childlabor,and theexploitation
of womenin sweatshops
and dangerous
trades.
The AMA first
brokeawayfromprogressivism
overtheissueofcompulsoryhealthinsurance;
andafteritshouseof delegates
condemned
healthinsurancein 1920, theassociation
cameto see theSheppard-Towner
Actas
onlyanother
formof thesamething.14
Statemedicalsocieties
in Massachusetts,New York,Illinois,Ohio,andIndianaspearheaded
theopposition
to
healthinsurance
and theSheppard-Towner
proposal.In its attackon the
bill and otherpublichealthmeasures,
Sheppard-Towner
theIllinoisMedical Journal,
official
organof theIllinoisStateMedicalSociety,declared:
"TodayWashington,
D. C., is a hotbedof Bolshevism.... Wherewillit
all end? We know whereit ended in ruinedRussia....
Can the people of
Americasetup Bureaucratic
in Washington
Autocracy
without
a resulting
'0Mary G. Kilbrethto Harding,Nov. 25, 1921, Box 157, folder 117-1, Harding Papers;
Senate, Protectionof Maternity,Hearings on S. 1039 before the Committeeon Education
and Labor, 67 Cong., 1 Sess.,No. 61, pp. 7-13.
'1 Cong. Record,67 Cong., 1 Sess.,Appendix,lxi, 8759-69.
12 Such groups included the Citizens Medical ReferenceBureau, the
AmericanDrugless
Association, the American Medical Liberty League, Inc., and the New York AntiVivisectionistSociety. "The Lobby Discusses the 'MaternityBill,'
Capital Eye, I (Oct.
1921), 6-8; Grace Cole to Harding,May 16, 1921; Lenora B. Simpkinsto Harding,May 18,
[921, Box 157, folder
117-1, HardingPapers.
1 Burrow,AMA, 65-67, 105, 157-58.
141bid.,157-58.
This content downloaded on Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:20:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
The Sheppard-Towner
Act
781
industrial
slavery?"I'5
The Journalof theAmericanMedicalAsssociation
launcheditscampaignagainstSheppard-Towner
on February
5, 1921,and
itcontinued
to opposetheactuntilitwasrepealed.'6
The 1922AMA house
of delegatescondemnedSheppard-Towner
as an "importedsocialistic
scheme."'7
In the1920stheAMA did notspeakforthewholemedicalprofession.
The Mayobrothers
andotherprominent
medicalfigures
fromhospitals
and
universities
endorsedSheppard-Towner.
The MedicalWoman'sNational
Associationwas a steadfastproponentof the programthroughout
the
1920s.This association
calledforfederalaid to maternity
in 1917,joined
the WJCC in 1920, and promoted
in its own journal
Sheppard-Towner
throughout
thedecade.18
The MedicalWoman'sJournal
hailedDr. JosephineBakeras oneof theworld'sgreatcitizens
forherworkinreducing
by
theinfantdeathrateinNew YorkCity.'9Bakertestified
50 percent
repeatedlyforSheppard-Towner,
was a constant
allyof theNationalConsumers'
League and the League of WomenVoters,and becamepresident
of the
MedicalWoman'sNationalAssociation
intheearly1930s.WhiletheAMA
lamentedits failureto preventthepassageof theSheppard-Towner
Act,
thewomenphysicians
spokeof thefineworkbeingdone.20
In retrospect,
thispioneering
bill seemspitifully
small.The actauthorizedan appropriation
of $1,480,000forfiscal1921-1922and $1,240,000
forthenextfiveyearsendingJune30, 1927.Of thissum,$5,000wouldgo
to each stateoutright;
$5,000 morewouldgo to each stateif matching
fundswereprovided;and therestwouldbe allocatedon a population
percentageand matching
basis.The costof administering
theprogram
could
notexceed$50,000,and themoneywas channeledbytheChildren'sBureauthrough
thestatechildwelfareor healthdivisions.Beforea federal
" Illinois MedicalJournal(May 19201), quoted in Citizens Medical ReferenceBureau,
BulletinNo. 33 (May 30, 1920), Box 157, folder 117-1, Harding Papers.
" JournaloftheAmerican
MedicalAssociation,
76 (Feb. 5, 1921), 383.
"TIbid.,78 (June 3, 1922), 1709.
"8Kate C. Mead, "Is InfantMortalityan Index to Social Welfare? Scandinavia'sReply,"
Woman'sMedicalJournal,
XXVII (Jan. 1917), 10-15; EstherLovejoy, "Democracyand
Health," ibid.,XXIX (June 1919), 116-24; Lauara L. Mearns to Editor,MedicalWoman's
Journal,XXVII (Feb. 1920), 62; "The Sheppard-TownerBill," ibid., XXVIII (Jan.
1921), 13-14; Editorial,ibid.,22.
19 "One of the World's Great Citizens,"MedicalWoman's
XXIX (Aug. 1922),
Journal,
180-82.
0"What Legislatorsare Doing for Mothers and Babies," ibid.,XXVIII (July 1921),
189; Frances Sage Bradley,"The Sheppard-TownerBill As it is Worked Out by Arkansas
Women," ibid.,XXIX (Aug. 1922), 196-97; Mary Riggs Noble, "PrenatalWork in Pennsylvania,"ibid.,XXXI (March 1924), 69-70; Ellen Stadtmuller,"Promotionof Maternal
and Infant Welfare in California,"ibid.,66-67; Frances Sage Bradley,"What is Hoped
and Planned in Arkansas," ibid.,67-68; William H. Peters,"Cincinnati'sParticipationin
Sheppard-TownerWork," ibid.,72-73.
This content downloaded on Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:20:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
782
History
of American
The Journal
providea satgrantwouldbe made,a statehadtopassenablinglegislation,
funds.
and votematching
theprogram,
plan forimplementing
isfactory
therightto rejectaid. The law
retained
Boththestateand theindividual
of eitherstateor federalgoverndeniedagentsor representatives
expressly
ortotakechargeofa childwithmentthepowerto entera homeuninvited
and
in hygieneof maternity
out legal consent.It providedforinstruction
centers,
publichealthnurses,visitingnurses,consultation
infancy
through
distribution.
andliterature
childcareconferences,
Actwas well receivedbythestate
By and large,theSheppard-Towner
onlyConnectistatesjoinedin 1922; and eventually,
authorities.
Forty-one
thelegislaaloof.In New Jersey,
remained
cut,Illinois,and Massachusetts
vetoin 1922. In Washingturepassedtheenablingactoverthegovernor's
opposed,andonlytheelectionof a new
was unalterably
ton,thegovernor
Louisianawaiteduntil
allowedthestateto jointheprogram.
chiefexecutive
opand Vermontjoinedin 1926. Unexpected
1924 to entertheprogram,
positionkeptRhodeIslandoutuntil1925, and Maineand Kansasfinally
in 1927.
accepted
NathanMiller,whohad upsetAlfredE. Smith
In New York,Governor
in theHardingsweepof 1920,toldtheopeningsessionofthe1922legislaturethathe wouldveto anybill whichwouldacceptSheppard-Towner.
fortheShepformed
theAssociation
women'sorganizations
Twenty-eight
$75,000for
Actand workedto haveNew Yorkappropriate
pard-Towner
that
Miller
declared
but
petitions,
circulated
The Association
theprogram.
ifeverywomaninthestatesigned."Thepeople
hewouldnotbe influenced
In keepingwithMilwithmenin office."
... haveno businessto interfere
Act.
rejectedthe Sheppard-Towner
formally
ler's mood,the legislature
thefinancial
drainof a maternity
Millersigned
program,
Whiledeploring
a bill whichappropriated
$125,000 for a hog barn on the statefair
"It
grounds;and he approvedof a twinbarnfor1923. Kelleyremarked:
of New
theoutlookof a candidateforthegovernorship
doesnotimprove
together
in working
of womenexperienced
Yorkto have28 organizations
thandyingmothers
knowthatswineshelters
appealto himmorestrongly
and babies."Millerlost the nextelectionto Al Smith,who pushedthe
the
thelegislature
in 1923. Smithcredited
planthrough
Sheppard-Towner
New YorkLeagueof WomenVotersforthepassageof thebill.21
The Connecticut
moneyon the
rejectedSheppard-Towner
legislature
21Nathan Miller quoted in letterto Editor fromHarriet W. Laidlaw, March 10, 1922,
folder 27, Harriet W. Laidlaw Papers (SchlesingerLibrary,Radcliffe); Florence Kelley,
"The Children's Amendment,"Good Housekeeping, LXXVI (Feb. 1923), 170; Alfred
E. Smith, "SafeguardingOur Assets-the Children,"Ladies' Home Journal,XLVI (Oct.
1929), 304.
This content downloaded on Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:20:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Act
The Sheppard-Towner
783
thatitinfringed
on therights
ofthestate.The stateappropriations
grounds
Thisreacommittee
declaredthatitwastimetostopthefederalaid process.
same
advocates
whenthe
son seemedhollowto Sheppard-Towner
committee votedto accepta new federalaid programforan airplanesquadron.
thelegislature
established
a stateprogram
Nevertheless,
formaternity
and
with an appropriation
of $55,000. This sum was
infancyprotection
$12,000lessthanwouldhavebeenmadeavailableto thestateunderSheppard-Towner.
theappropriation
Furthermore,
was offset
bya $30,720cut
in the fundsforthe Bureauof Child Welfare.This bureau,themajor
achievement
of theConnecticut
Leagueof WomenVotersin the1921legwaspartially
to
islature,
cause.22
sacrificed thestatesrights
Fromthe outset,Massachusetts
spawnedmostof the organizedeffort
againsttheSheppard-Towner
plan.A stateproposalformaternity
and infancyprotection
had failedtopassthreeconsecutive
years,1919,1920,and
1921-the last timeit receivedonlytwopositivevotesin thelegislature.
The oppositionof themedicalprofession
had beenparticularly
vigorous.
One groupof critics
labelledthemeasure"The beginning
of Communism
in Medicine.A veryunjust,unwise,iniquitous
& socialistic
bill." "Vicious,
un-American,
paternal.""It is a steptowardSovietism."23
Whenthelegislaturebegan consideration
of an enablingact for Sheppard-Towner
in
1922,theattorney
general(an anti-suffragist
whohadruledwomenoffthe
ballotand outof thejuryboxin Massachusetts)
issuedan opinionthatthe
Sheppard-Towner
Act wouldmisusethetax moneyof Massachusetts
and
was unconstitutional
becauseit violatedthe reservedrightsof thestates.
The statefileda suitwiththeUnitedStatesSupreme
Courton behalfofits
taxpayers
to enjointhelaw. Fearingthata statewas ineligible
to filea taxpayer'ssuit,HarrietFrothingham,
president
of theWomanPatriots,
filed
another
suitin theSupremeCourtof theDistrict
of Columbia.Whenthis
courtdismissed
hercaseandtheUnitedStatesCourtofAppealsconcurred,
she appealedto theUnitedStatesSupremeCourt.UnitedStatesSolicitor
GeneralJamesBeckconsidered
theSheppard-Towner
Actto be unconstitutionalandencouraged
Massachusetts
topursuethecase.24
These suitsseriously
threatened
the wholerangeof federalprograms
whichprovidedeitherdirectaid or matching
grants.Ironically,
at thevery
timethatMassachusetts
waschallenging
Sheppard-Towner
forviolating
the
22
Woman Voter's Bulletin (ConnecticutLeague of Women Voters], III (May 3, 1923),
2; ibid., III (July 1923), 1-2.
23 "Why Physiciansare Opposing MaternityBill," sent to
Harding by the Massachusetts
Civic Alliance,Box 157, folder117-1,HardingPapers.
'Upton to Harding,Dec. 2, 1922, Box 157, folder117-1, Harding Papers; Marian Parkhurst to Cornelia Bryce Pinchot, Dec. 7, 1922, Box 24, Cornelia Bryce Pinchot Papers
(ManuscriptDivision, Libraryof Congress).
This content downloaded on Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:20:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
784
The Journalof AmericanHistory
other
moneyundertwenty-two
thestatewas accepting
TenthAmendment,
highway
county
agents,
fromsoilsurveys,
whichextended
federalprograms
rustandthe
of thewhite-pine
building,and statemilitiato theeradication
of Land GrantColEuropeancornborer.Ten statesand theAssociation
On June5, 1923,theSupremeCourtdismissed
legesfiledcounter-briefs.
rulingon theconstitutionand without
bothsuitsforwantof jurisdiction
alityoftheact.25
a permanent
was considered
law,butitsappropriation
Sheppard-Towner
thatthe
to ceaseautomatically
on June30, 1927. Confident
was scheduled
movedin 1926tohavetheauthorizaitsproponents
was a success,
program
exThe House of Representatives
quicklyvoteda two-year
tionextended.
mobilizedto
tensionby thehealthymarginof 218 to 44, butopponents
MedicalAssostopthebill in theSenate.The foesincludedtheAmerican
PublicInterests
League,Sentinels
Massachusetts
ciation,WomanPatriots,
(In 1921,
of theAmerican
Revolution.
oftheRepublic,andtheDaughters
butitwas
themeasure,
as a member
oftheWJCC,theDAR hadsupported
was freshfrom
causes.) The opposition
no longerespousingprogressive
proposal-thefederalchild
beatenanotherprogressive
havingrecently
Theyechoedtheusual cries: "socializingmedicine,"
laboramendment.26
"Bolshevism."27
andintroducing
thechildren,"
"nationalizing
ReSenatorThomasA. Bayardof DelawarereadintotheCongressional
from
and
letter
the
Patriots.
It
Woman
propagepetition
corda thirty-six
for
program
originsof theentireprogressive
portedto showtheBolshevist
Bureau,
Act,theChildren's
whichincludedtheSheppard-Towner
children,
The petition
tracedan inchildlaborlaws,andthechildlaboramendment.
national
together
which
the
organizations
women's
tricateweb
joined
to sovietizetheUnitedStates.It was a feminist-socialistin a conspiracy
of Florence
She
KelleyWishnieweski.
communist
plotundertheleadership
hasproduced."
as "theablestlegislative
generalCommunism
was described
thewomenonboth
alsodenounced
JaneAddams,JuliaLathrop,
Thepetition
of Laborand Reportsof
25Reportsof theDept. of Labor,1923,Reportof theSecretary
1924), 117-20.
theBureaus(Washington,
' RichardB. Sherman,
Mid-America,
"The Rejectionof the Child LaborAmendment,"
"TheNewWomanintheNewEra: TheWoman
Lemons,
XLV (Jan.1963), 3-17;J.Stanley
University
fromtheGreatWar to theGreatDepression"(doctoraldissertation,
Movement
ofMissouri,1967), 319-24.
86 (Feb. 6, 1926), 421; ibid.,87 (Nov.
MedicalAssociation,
2"journalof theAmerican
X
Act,"WomanPatriot,
AppealforRejectionofMaternity
27, 1926), 1833-34;"Sentinels
Fallaciesof Sheppard-Towner
Act,"
(Feb. 15, 1926), 32; WilliamC. Woodward,"Further
as based
AMA, 161, seestheAMA's opposition
ibid.,X (Dec. 1, 1926), 178-80.Burrow,
of benefits
withoutclearlydefined
and thegranting
of federalsubsidization
on its distrust
guidelines.
This content downloaded on Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:20:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Act
The Sheppard-Towner
785
orgatheconstituent
NationalCommittees,
andDemocratic
theRepublican
the
Association,
nizationsof the WJCC (such as the Parent-Teachers
Temperance
the
Women's
Christian
and
League of Women Voters,
Bureau,andtheUnitedStates
Union),theWomen'sBureau,theChildren's
underhisfrank
ofLabor.Bayardmailedcopiesofthispetition
Department
of the
of theDAR; afterwhich,thepresident-general
to all stateofficers
urgedthedefeatofSheppard-Towner.28
organization
and propoThe bill was blockedin theSenatefornearlyeightmonths,
whichextendedtheapproprianentswereforcedto accepta compromise
on June
tionsfortwomoreyearsbutrepealedthelaw itselfautomatically
politicalcliof theacthopedthata moreprogressive
30, 1929. Supporters
to
Efforts
matewouldexistby 1929 and thatthelaw wouldbe restored.
programwereresumedin 1928. The WJCC and
preservethe maternity
ralliedbehinda billwhichwasmoreliberalthanShepotherorganizations
thatthe moneywouldbe spentin cooperation
It specified
pard-Towner.
bythestatelegislatures
butdidnotrequireeitheracceptance
withthestates,
theWomanPaor matching
funds.The AmericanMedicalAssociation,
of theRepublicled theopposition
again.Bynow,
and theSentinels
triots,
abouta woman'svotingbloc,and the
wereless concerned
thepoliticians
of Congress
had freerplay.Although
progressive
conservative
propensities
in Congress.
This timethe
womenstilllobbiedforthebill,it languished
formalstatewouldnothelp.HerbertHooverissuedperfunctory
President
he alto pressthematter,
and refusing
mentswhichurgedits enactment;
federal
social
to
lapse.
first
security
law
lowedthe
Bureau
theworkunderSheppard-Towner,
theChildren's
In reviewing
183,252healthconferences
forthesevenyearsthatit conducted
reported
centers
of prenatalcare.Visitingnurses
2,978 permanent
and established
had been
made3,131,996homevisits,and 22,020,489piecesof literature
In the finalfouryears,morethan 4,000,000 infantsand
distributed.
mothers
hadbeenreached.
deathratein 1921
The infant
700,000expectant
and theyearsunderSheppardwas seventy-five
per thousandlive births,
The maternal
deathratewas
Townersawit fallto sixty-four
perthousand.
and threetenthsperthousandin 1921 to sixtyreducedfromsixty-seven
in 1927,despitethefactthatthegeneraldeathrateof
twoandthreetenths
forthesameperiod.Obviously,
muchmore
all peoplehad risenslightly
per
neededto be done;New Zealandhad an infantdeathrateofthirty-five
notedthatGreat
thousand.The MedicalWoman'sNationalAssociation
28Cong.Record,69 Cong., 1 Sess., 12918-52 (July 3, 1926); ibid.,69 Cong., 2 Sess.,
1280-81 (Jan. 8, 1927).
This content downloaded on Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:20:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
786
The Journalof AmericanHistory
Britain'smaternaldeath ratewas 50 percentthatof the United States;and
Britainspent$3,800,000 at the same timethe United Stateswas spending
only $1,240,000.29
stateshad
The end of the act did not leave a completevoid: forty-five
participateddirectlyafter1926, and Illinois and Connecticuthad theirown
programs.Most stateshad theapparatusand theawarenessof theproblemto
continuematernity
and infancyaid on theirown. The removalof federal
the programs.Only sixteenstatesappropriated
funds,however,restricted
enoughmoneyto exceed or equal the previoustotal.Althoughsome states,
as the depressiondeepened,theplan
at first,greatlyincreasedtheirefforts,
An
suffered
badly in the fiscalpinch.Severalstatesdroppedit altogether.30
attemptto revive the federal part in 1931 failed when SenatorsDavid
againstit.ConsiderWalsh, MillardTydings,and ElbertThomas filibustered
ationof maternity
and infancyprotectionwas mergedwiththebroaderdevelopmentof social securitylegislationwithinthe New Deal. Restoration
and incame withthe Social SecurityAct of 1935. Protectionof maternity
measure.Opponents
fancywas embodiedin Title V of the comprehensive
were shocked at the provisionswhich authorizedappropriationsfor the
Children's Bureau of $5,820,000 for maternityand infancyprotection,
$3,870,000 for crippledchildren,and $24,750,000 for aid to dependent
children.
The Sheppard-TownerAct was both an example of the persistenceof
progressivism
in the 1920s and a link betweenthe progressiveperiod and
no lack of effortbecause progresthe New Deal. Its travaildemonstrated
sives securedits passage in 1921, expanded it to includeHawaii in 1924,
in 1926, and obtaineditsacceptancein forty-five
renewedits appropriations
states.Even thoughconservativeforceswere able to eliminateit on the eve
of the depression,advocatesof the idea finallytriumphedduringtheNew
Deal.
29 United States
Dept. of Labor, Children'sBureau, PublicationNo. 203, The Promotion
of the Welfareand Hygiene of Maternityand Infancy(Washington,1931), 26-37; Dorothy
KirchweyBrown,Speech at Chicago Forum [Winter 1928-19291,DorothyKirchweyBrown
Papers (Schlesinger Library,Radcliffe); Rosina Wistein, "Maternal Mortality: A Comparative Study,"Medical Woman's Journal,XXXIV (Feb. 1932), 28-32.
soUnited StatesDept. of Labor, The Promotionof the Welfareand Hygieneof Maternity
and Infancy,38-39; KatherineP. Lenroot to Carrie Chapman Catt, Aug. 1, 1932, Box 1,
CarrieChapmanCattPapers (New York Public Library).
This content downloaded on Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:20:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions