{"id":21,"date":"2023-05-05T14:47:38","date_gmt":"2023-05-05T18:47:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sites.usnh.edu\/hoslac\/?page_id=21"},"modified":"2024-01-12T10:58:34","modified_gmt":"2024-01-12T15:58:34","slug":"advanced-topic-reproductive-histories","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/sites.usnh.edu\/hoslac\/advanced-topic-reproductive-histories\/","title":{"rendered":"Advanced Topic: Reproductive Histories"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n\tIntroduction<\/strong>
\nBy: Dr. Cassia Roth, Associate Professor, University of Georgia\n

With this collection of sources, we hope to bring to a wider audience the history of reproduction and fertility control in Latin American history by focusing on nineteenth- and early twentieth-century Mexico and Brazil. The sources are wide ranging – including handwritten notes from post-abortive women to their midwives, to institutional reports on alternative obstetric training, to criminal cases of abortion. They involve a variety of actors. The most obvious are the women who became pregnant, gave birth, or sought to control their fertility. Women also appear as midwives, less often as obstetricians, and always as family members. But men are not absent. Of course, the most obvious place we see men are in positions of authority: as police officers investigating abortion-related deaths, as judges condemning women for infanticide, as obstetricians delivering babies, or as husbands and fathers dismayed at their “wayward” women in their lives. Women may have borne the bodily burden of reproduction, but men were most certainly involved.<\/p>\n

The experiences of the people who appear in these sources were not only marked by gender. Race and class were also salient facets of their identities. Poor women, often of African or indigenous descent, bore the brunt of state efforts to control women’s reproductive capabilities, both because they held less privacy than their white, middle-class counterparts and because authorities often viewed them as inherently “dangerous.” But strictures were not simply top-down. Intra-class denunciations of fertility control show how normative views on gender and sexuality circulated far beyond the hospitals and courtrooms. How did race and class affect women’s experiences with healthcare, in relation to access and quality? How did it affect patterns of the criminalization of fertility control? Whose voices are lost to the historical record? What were the worldviews of those voices to which we do have access?<\/p>\n

With these sources, readers will see that women’s experiences with healthcare could be both traumatizing and dangerous. They will explore how the institutional structures of healthcare themselves were built, contested, and even destroyed over time. Alternative forms of training were built and rebuilt, often in response to small and large forms of resistance. Friction between midwives and obstetricians was sometimes heated in the early twentieth century. How were health care providers trained? How did gendered understandings of proper social roles play into this? How did it affect the delivery of healthcare services?<\/p>\n

Many scholars have addressed the questions posed above, and the history of reproduction in Latin America is a growing field. Yet the term is broad – reproduction can refer to the reproduction of anything, from babies to social mores to factory goods. Marx, for example, defined reproduction as the reproduction of the entire capitalist system. Clarifying what we mean when we say “the history of reproduction” is thus crucial. Biological reproduction-the activities that encompass the conception, carrying, and birth of a new human being-includes sexual intercourse, miscarriage, childbirth, and breastfeeding, among others. Biological reproduction requires both male and female bodies, but it is the female-bodied person who is more tethered to its exigencies. Although today we know that not all people who are pregnant identify as women, these more fluid gender identities are a modern phenomenon, and before the twenty-first century they were not firmly established (and, as we know, are still contested today). We also know that modern medicine played a large role in producing (and naturalizing) what we understand as categories of womanhood. Thus, when we speak of women, we refer to womanhood as a category, not only as relating to individual women. For these reasons we can say that, historically, women have borne the burden of biological reproduction more acutely than men have. This burden spanned legal, interpersonal, and economic realms as well as biological ones. Women were not only corporealized as mothers. Their reproductive experiences were also extrapolated from private contexts to convey moralized judgements about their behavior, rationality, and worth.<\/p>\n

Biological reproduction, of course, does not end with the weaning of an infant. Feminists have expanded upon the biological by using the term “social reproduction,” which refers to, in the words of Evelyn Nakano Glenn, “the array of activities and relationships involved in maintaining people both on a daily basis and intergenerationally.” This includes household chores such as cooking and cleaning and “maintaining kin and community ties.” This feminist critique of Marxist understandings of production, centered solely on the “economic” or “productive” spheres, reframes the unpaid labor of the home as central to the functioning of society. Clearly, biological and social reproduction are not mutually exclusive or disconnected, and historical sources that focus on the biological often touch on the social: a woman who sought out an abortion in early twentieth-century Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, for example, brought her two-and-a-half-year-old son with her to the procedure that eventually killed her. Before her death, she told police she couldn’t afford to have another child.<\/p>\n

Over the last thirty years, historians of Latin America have emphasized varying aspects of the history of biological reproduction without necessarily defining it as such. Studies of sexual (dis)honor have dominated the historiography of both the colonial and modern periods, with emphasis on gendered double standards, religious prescriptions, and shifting meanings of social and racial status. In the modern period, scholars also have focused on prostitution, the most “dishonorable” profession. But what is sex if not the first act in reproduction? The history of sex work is the history of reproduction, whether or not it is specifically framed as such.<\/p>\n

More recently, historians of medicine have turned toward the history of childbirth, exploring it on its own terms and in relation to much larger themes including slavery, nation-building, and religion. Another, crucial area of growth has been the history of fertility control, often defined in its negative sense. Both historically and contemporarily, to “control” one’s fertility can have both “negative” and “positive” connotations. To be clear, with these terms we are not passing any moral judgements in relation to the reproductive practice in question. An abortion, for example, can be a “positive” act for a woman who doesn’t want a child even though it is a “negative” aspect of reproduction in that it impedes it. The popular and scholarly understanding of “fertility control” most often references its negative aspects, perhaps better described as “anti-conception”, including contraception – in all its forms – abortion, and infanticide, a practice that was much more common until the early twentieth century. But it can also include “positive” or pro-conception facets, with fertility treatments and prayers to support conception.<\/p>\n

In Latin America, scholars have focused on the negative aspect, often because the historical sources available tend to overrepresent them by presenting them as “problems” rather than normal activities. When abortion and infanticide were criminalized, as they were (and continue to be) in many places in Latin America, the historical record overemphasizes the “criminal” aspects of these histories. As such, we only get the sensational cases – the abortions and sometimes childbirths that led to maternal death. Those that occurred without problems are lost to the historical record.<\/p>\n

To be clear, abortion and infanticide are not the same crime, and we do not define them as such. Infanticide has always been criminalized as a variant of homicide, a crime “apart” from abortion, but one women commonly resorted to throughout the colonial and modern periods. Abortion was also criminalized (and continues to be in most parts of Latin America), but it had more caveats and leniency within its legal parameters. But legal and medical practitioners, as well as the public at large, often confused the two.<\/p>\n

This collection will bring you into the reproductive worlds of the men and women of nineteenth- and twentieth-century Mexico and Brazil. Their stories and struggles shaped the modern formation of their respective nations. We hope these sources give them the historical attention they deserve.<\/p>\n

This work has received support from the Lilly Teaching Fellowship from the Center for Teaching and Learning at the University of Georgia.<\/p>\n

Further Reading:<\/strong><\/p>\n

Bhattacharya, Tithi. ed.,\u00a0Social Reproduction Theory: Remapping Class, Recentering Oppression.<\/em>\u00a0Pluto Press, 2017.<\/p>\n

Bliss, Katherine Elaine.\u00a0Compromised Positions: Prostitution, Public Health, and Gender Politics in Revolutionary Mexico City<\/em>. Pennsylvania State University Press, 2001.<\/p>\n

Bourbonnais, Nicole.\u00a0Birth Control in the Decolonizing Caribbean: Reproductive Politics and Practice on Four Islands, 1930-1970<\/em>. Cambridge University Press, 2016.<\/p>\n

Caulfield, Sueann.\u00a0In Defense of Honor: Sexual Morality, Modernity, and Nation in Early-Twentieth Century Brazil<\/em>. Duke University Press, 2000.<\/p>\n

De Barros, Juanita.\u00a0Reproducing the British Caribbean: Sex, Gender, and Population Politics after Slavery<\/em>. University of North Carolina Press, 2014.<\/p>\n

Fissell, Mary.\u00a0Vernacular Bodies: The Politics of Reproduction in Early Modern England.<\/em>\u00a0Oxford University Press, 2004.<\/p>\n

Flemming, Rebecca. “Fertility Control in Ancient Rome.”\u00a0Women’s History Review<\/em>\u00a030, no. 6 (2021): 896-914.<\/p>\n

Glenn, Evelyn Nakano. “From Servitude to Service Work: Historical Continuities in the Racial Division of Paid Reproductive Labor,”\u00a0Signs<\/em>\u00a018, no. 1 (1992): 1 – 43.<\/p>\n

Guy, Donna J.\u00a0Sex and Danger in Buenos Airs: Prostitution, Family, and Nation in Argentina<\/em>. University of Nebraska Press, 1990.<\/p>\n

Jaffary, Nora E.\u00a0Reproduction and Its Discontents in Mexico: Childbirth and Contraception from 1750 to 1905<\/em>. University of North Carolina Press, 2016.<\/p>\n

Kimball, Natalie L.\u00a0An Open Secret: The History of Unwanted Pregnancy and Abortion in Modern Bolivia<\/em>. Rutgers University Press, 2020.<\/p>\n

Moscucci, Ornella.\u00a0The Science of Woman: Gynaecology and Gender in England, 1800-1929<\/em>. Cambridge University Press, 1993.<\/p>\n

Necochea L\u00f3pez, Ra\u00fal.\u00a0A History of Family Planning in Twentieth Century Peru<\/em>. University of North Carolina Press, 2014.<\/p>\n

O’Brien, Elizabeth. “Intimate Interventions: The Cultural Politics of Reproductive Surgery in Mexico, 1790-1940.” PhD Diss., University of Texas at Austin, 2019.<\/p>\n

Roth, Cassia.\u00a0A Miscarriage of Justice: Women’s Reproductive Lives and the Law in Early Twentieth-Century Brazil<\/em>. Stanford University Press, 2020.<\/p>\n

Su\u00e1rez Findlay, Eileen J. Imposing Decency: The Politics of Sexuality and Race in Puerto Rico, 1870-1920<\/em>. Duke University Press, 1999.<\/p>\n

Turner, Sasha.\u00a0Contested Bodies: Pregnancy, Childrearing, and Slavery in Jamaica.\u00a0<\/em>University of Pennsylvania Press, 2017.<\/p>\n

Twinam, Ann.\u00a0Public Lives, Private Secrets: Gender, Honor, Sexuality, and Illegitimacy in Colonial Spanish America<\/em>. Stanford University Press, 1999.<\/p>\n

Von Germeten, Nicole.\u00a0Profit and Passion: Transactinal Sex in Colonial Mexico.<\/em>\u00a0University of California Press, 2018.<\/p>\n

Vosne Martins, Ana Paula.\u00a0Vis\u00f5es do feminino: a medicina da mulher nos s\u00e9culos XIX e XX<\/em>. Editora Fiocruz, 2004.<\/p>\n

Yarfitz, Mir.\u00a0Impure Migration: Jews and Sew Work in Golden Age Argentina<\/em>. Rutgers University Press, 2019.<\/p>\n

Z\u00e1rate Campos, Mar\u00eda Soledad.\u00a0Dar a luz en Chile, siglo XIX: De la ‘ciencia de hembra’ a la ciencia obst\u00e9trica.\u00a0<\/em>Ediciones Universidade Alberto Hurtado, 2007.<\/p>\n\t

Brazil<\/strong><\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\tNotes on “Reproductive Crimes”<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tExpand<\/i><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t

Dr. Cassia Roth, University of Georgia<\/p>\n

INTRODUCTION<\/strong><\/p>\n

This series of four handwritten notes from four different historical actors in early twentieth-century Rio de Janeiro (called Cariocas) provides us a glimpse into the worldviews of women and men in relation to the practices of abortion and infanticide. The notes were all included as evidence in police investigations or court cases related to possible reproductive crimes. They come in the form of denunciations of neighbors (as in the 1904 note written by a woman below or the 1923 note authored by a male); as notes to the midwives who performed the abortion (as in one 1930 note); or as notes from dying women to their boyfriends (as in the other 1930 note). They provide a counterpart to more traditional historical sources on fertility control by bringing us into the worldviews of all those involved in the practices.<\/p>\n

One thing historical sources on fertility control, including abortion and infanticide, in Latin America can tell us is that regardless of the surrounding legal or medical restrictions, women will continue to seek out ways to not have children. We also know how elite policymakers, whether church officials, medical practitioners, or government legislators, viewed abortion and infanticide – as grave sins and an affront to the patriarchal and racialized order of nineteenth- and early twentieth-century Latin America. We know less about how everyday people felt about these practices.<\/p>\n

In 1904, Margarida Rosa de Assump\u00e7\u00e3o, a resident of the city of Rio de Janeiro, let the authorities – and her neighbors – know exactly how she felt about both abortion and infanticide. In her two handwritten notes, Assump\u00e7\u00e3o denounced her neighbor, the nineteen-year-old “China” for committing infanticide after an unsuccessful abortion, as well as her aunt Lina for assisting her. The local police precinct opened an investigation, interrogating China, Lina, and China’s boyfriend Saturnino. China acknowledged that Saturnino had deflowered her – he had taken her virginity with the promise of marriage. She further admitted that she had unsuccessfully taken medication to provoke an abortion. In the end, she alleged that she gave birth to a stillborn infant. Although nothing resulted from the investigation, in fact, it seems to have languished on the detective’s death for years, Assump\u00e7\u00e3o’s denunciation provides a rare glimpse into intra-class condemnation of what she perceived as unruly and improper female sexuality. In addition to detailing China’s sexual exploits, Assump\u00e7\u00e3o implied that Lina was running a brothel. These were not behaviors of proper and honorable women, and thus for Assump\u00e7\u00e3o, they deserved to be brought to official attention.<\/p>\n

Questions for Further Exploration:<\/strong><\/p>\n

Men and women of the popular classes and of varying racial identities had their own positions on fertility control. Did they view abortion and infanticide as separate practices with different levels of gravity? Did they confuse the two? Did they sympathize with women who practiced abortion or infanticide? Why or why not? Why did Assump\u00e7\u00e3o denounce her neighbors to the police? What was her worldview toward gender and sexuality? Why do you think she held this position?<\/p>\n

Source: Arquivo Nacional, Rio de Janeiro (AN) 0R.0.IQP.3065 (1904)<\/p>\n

TRANSCRIPTION<\/strong><\/p>\nNote 1:
\n<\/strong>Dr Delgado\n

Na travessa 11 de Maio 16 uma moca donzella teve uma crean\u00e7a e esta crean\u00e7a foi morta por uma tal tia Lina. Afim de n\u00e3o aparecer o fructo de um crime. Esta donzella tem por apelido ‘China’ o pae \u00e9 machinista do vapor Brazil esta tramoia foi feito emquanto o pae esteve 5 meses e tanto f\u00f3ra, querendo testemunha procure na mesma travessa 19 a Rosa parteira que \u00e9 uma testemunha a Albertina que foi que apreciou e o Dr. Mour\u00e3o que examinou e disse a alguem que ella estava n’um estado tao adiantado, afinal todos da estalagem sabem d’este caso. a crean\u00e7a foi interrado no por\u00e3o da casa.<\/p>\n

Margarida Rosa de Assump\u00e7\u00e3o<\/p>\nNote 2:
\n<\/strong>Dr. Delegado,\n

Vou vos contar um caso que se passou na Travessa 11 de maio, no. 16 casinha, no. 1 que adivinira o mundo intero.<\/p>\n

Nesta casa tem uma grande feiticera por nome Lina que faz toda sorte de feti\u00e7os arranja homen pras mulher d\u00e1 sorte a quem n\u00e3o tem da fortuna e tambem aluga quarto pra rapazes a 500rs. cada h\u00f3ra. Vou contar o caso.<\/p>\n

Tem n’esta casa 2 mo\u00e7a uma chama-se Rita e outra China esta namorou um rapaz por nome Saturnino, passados tempos esta rapaz fez mal a China e ella ficou gravida disia a todos que era molestia foi consultar ao Dr. Mour\u00e3o e elle disse que ella estava j\u00e1 com 7 a 8 mez de gravidez ahi a feiticera principiou a fazer remedios e feiti\u00e7os pra ella bot\u00e1 o filho fora mas tanto fez que a crian\u00e7a nasceu bohnita e esperta e a feiticera apertou a garganta da innocentinha e enterrou no pur\u00e3o da mesma casa. O pae desta 2 mo\u00e7as \u00e9 o machinista do Brasil vapor \u00e9 o Jos\u00e9 Bezerra tudo se passou durante as grande viagem d’elle.<\/p>\n

A feticeira tem um feto j\u00e1 muito antigo dentro de um vidro que dis que foi da China mas \u00e9 mentira todos da estalage sabe disso, quem me contou foi a Albertina que vio o caso o feto ella arranjou a muito tempo.<\/p>\n

sua criada<\/p>\n

Margarida Assump\u00e7\u00e3o<\/p>\n

TRANSLATION<\/strong><\/p>\nNote 1:
\n<\/strong>Dr. Police Chief,\n

In the Travessa Onze de Maio number 16 a young woman had a child and that child was killed by a certain person, Aunt Lina, so that the fruit of a crime would not appear. This young woman goes by the nickname “China” and her father is the machinist of the steamship Brazil. This tricky scheme was done while the father was away for five months. So, if you want a witness, look on the same mews number 19, for the midwife Rosa who is a witness and Albertina who came to know [the situation] and the examining Doctor Mour\u00e3o and said to somebody that she was in a very advanced stage [of pregnancy], finally everyone from the tenement knows about the case. The child was buried in the basement of the house. – Margarida Rosa da Assump\u00e7\u00e3o.<\/p>\nNote 2:
\n<\/strong>Dr. Police Chief,\n

I am going to tell you something that happened in the Travessa 11 de Maio, n. 16, house n. 1 that everyone has surmised. In this house there is a great sorceress [feiticeira] by the name of Lina who does all sorts of spellcasting, procures men for women, and gives luck to those that don’t have fortune and also rents rooms to young men at 500 [mil]reis per hour. I am going to tell about the case.<\/p>\n

There is in this house 2 young women, one is named Rita and the other China, who got involved with a boy by the name of Saturnino. Some time ago, this boy ruined [fez mal] China and she became pregnant [and] she said to everyone that it was an illness. She went to consult Doctor Mour\u00e3o, and he said that she was already 7 or 8 months pregnant and then the sorceress began to make medicine and magic in order to cast out [bota fora] the child but it was so that the child was born beautiful and smart and the sorceress squeezed the neck of the little innocent child and buried it in the basement of the same house. The father of these 2 young women is a machinist on the steamship Brazil. He is Jos\u00e9 Bezerra, and everything happened when he was on a long journey.<\/p>\n

The sorceress has a very old fetus in a bottle that she says was China’s, but that is a lie, everyone in the boarding house knows that. It was Albertina who told me, she saw the incident. Lina got that fetus a long time ago. – Your Servant Margarida Assump\u00e7\u00e3o.<\/p>\nFurther Reading
\n<\/strong>Caulfield, Sueann.\u00a0In Defense of Honor: Sexual Morality, Modernity, and Nation in EarlyTwentieth-Century Brazil.<\/em>\u00a0Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2000.\n

Caulfield, Sueann, and Martha de Abreu Esteves. “50 Years of Virginity in Rio de Janeiro: Sexual Politics and Gender Roles in Juridical and Popular Discourse, 1890-1940.”\u00a0Luso-Brazilian Review\u00a0<\/em>30, no. 1 (1993): 47-74.<\/p>\n

Roth, Cassia. A Miscarriage of Justice: Women’s Reproductive Lives and the Law in Early Twentieth Century-Brazil.\u00a0<\/em>Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2020.<\/p>\n

\"\"\u00a0\"\"\"\"<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\tLetter Denouncing Abortion<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tExpand<\/i><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t

Dr. Cassia Roth, University of Georgia<\/p>\n

INTRODUCTION<\/strong><\/p>\n

The history of abortion and infanticide is a history dominated by women: as the people who could conceive and had to decide to terminate their pregnancy or murder their newborn, for a variety of reasons both rational and irrational. Women were not only those who sought out an abortion or committed infanticide but were friends who accompanied their neighbors on their reproductive quests, midwives who performed procedures, and mothers and daughters who lost their relatives to illegal and dangerous procedures.<\/p>\n

But men were active participants in the history of fertility control. After all, they were the fathers, husbands, boyfriends, sons, physicians, and legal authorities who hover at the margins of these sources. Sometimes, however, they took center stage. Such was the case with Palmyro Silva, a forty-eight-year-old Brazilian furniture merchant who felt appalled by the midwife in his neighborhood. In 1923, he denounced Maria Adelaide de Concei\u00e7\u00e3o Pinto Montenegro, a thirty-four-year-old Portuguese widow who was a “practical” midwife for the women in her neighborhood. She had no formal training; she declared herself a laundress in her testimony, but she was “known” in the neighborhood as someone who attended labor and delivery. She forcefully denied committing any abortions.<\/p>\n

Silva directed his letter not at the police but at the city’s medical regulatory board, who promptly forwarded the denunciation to the police. His handwriting is clear and firm, demonstrating more than a firm grasp on written Portuguese. In it, he underlines his social status, he was a furniture merchant (something the police reinforced in their own write-up). Silva implicitly contrasts his status to the “stupid” and unlicensed midwife causing havoc in his neighborhood. To his dismay, the police could not prove that Montenegro was performing abortions, only that she was illegally practicing medicine without a license (Article 156 of the Penal Code of 1890<\/a>). In the end, investigatory mishaps meant that Montenegro was never charged with anything. Perhaps she went back to delivering babies in the neighborhood. Perhaps she also went back to providing abortions. In many ways, Silva’s denunciation mirrors that of Margarida Rosa de Assump\u00e7\u00e3o.<\/p>\n

Questions for Further Exploration:<\/strong><\/p>\n

How does he articulate the proper forms of gender and sexuality in his note to authorities? How are they similar or different from those of Assump\u00e7\u00e3o? How did the authorities react to these denunciations and why?<\/p>\n

Source: Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (TJRJ) Maria Adelaide de Concei\u00e7\u00e3o Pinto Montenegro (1923)<\/p>\nTRANSCRIPTION
\n<\/strong>Illmo. Snr. Dr. Director do Departamento da Fiscalisa\u00e7\u00e3o da Medicina\n

Respeitosas sauda\u00e7\u00f5es<\/p>\n

Como brasileiro e christ\u00e3o cumpre-me levar ao vosso conhecimento os crimes praticados por uma parteira coriosa [sic] de nome Maria Adelaide de tal residente a Rua Emilio Zaluart [sic] n. 90, Esta\u00e7\u00e3o de Ramos. \u00c9 o caso Exmo. Senhor que esta Portugueza abusado das nossas leis por qualquer 40 mil reis faz um anjo sem o menor escrupulo \u00e9 questam de trazer dinheiro e se sujeitar \u00e1s suas estupidas opera\u00e7\u00f5es. Por ficarem em perigo de vida muitas senhoras tem arrenegado [renegado] tal lembran\u00e7a d’entro estas est\u00e1 D. Laura Machado dos Santos, residente a mesma rua n. 24 que poder\u00e1 informar milhares de casos neste sentido praticados pela j\u00e1 citada ‘parteira’.<\/p>\n

Esperando as providencias que o caso requer. Sou com todo repeito e estima.<\/p>\n

Palmyro Silva, Rua, digo Estrada da Penha 1147, commerciante em moveis, 18 de Novembro de 1923.<\/p>\nTRANSLATION
\n<\/strong>Most Eminent Sir, Doctor [and] Director of the Department of the Control of Medicine\n

Respectful greetings<\/p>\n

As a Brazilian and a Christian, I must bring to your knowledge the crimes practiced by a parteira coriosa [unlicensed midwife] by the name of Maria Adelaide de tal [so and so], resident of the Rua Emilio Zaluart [sic] n. 90, Esta\u00e7\u00e3o de Ramos. The case is, most Excellent Sir, that this Portuguese woman, abusing our laws for a mere 40 milr\u00e9is faz um anjo [literally, “makes an angel,” a reference to an abortionist or fazedora de anjos] without the slightest scruplesone just has to bring money and subject oneself to her stupid operations. Because their lives are in danger, many women have denied such a reminder among these is D. Laura Machado dos Santos, resident of the same street n. 24 who will be able to inform you of thousands of these cases in this sense practiced by the already mentioned ‘midwife.’<\/p>\n

Awaiting the measures that the case requires. I am with respect and esteem.<\/p>\n

Palmyro Silva, Rua, I mean, Estrada da Penha 1147, furniture merchant, 18 of November 1923<\/p>\nFurther Reading
\n<\/strong>Roth, Cassia.\u00a0A Miscarriage of Justice: Women’s Reproductive Lives and the Law in Early Twentieth-Century Brazil<\/em>. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2020.\n

\"\" \"\"<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\tLetter Between Lovers About an Abortion<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tExpand<\/i><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t

Dr. Cassia Roth, University of Georgia<\/p>\n

INTRODUCTION<\/strong><\/p>\n

Abortion in the early twentieth-century could be a dangerous endeavor. Its criminalization drove the practice underground, making it expensive and often unsafe as only certain practitioners who would run the risk of criminal prosecution offered the procedures. But even licensed and trained practitioners, operating within a climate of fear, could provide unsafe procedures. In 1928, this was the case with the trained midwife Maria da Gl\u00f3ria Amorim, who was charged with the abortion-related death (Article 300\u00a71 of the Penal Code of 1890<\/a>), of the twenty-two-year-old schoolteacher Philomena Figueiredo. The forty-three-year-old Amorim, received her midwifery diploma from Rio de Janeiro’s only medical school, and she operated a clinic from her home in the center-northern district of M\u00e9ier. When Figueiredo went to Amorim for reproductive healthcare under the false name “Helena”, the midwife noted that she was suffering from gonorrhea. Amorim performed some vaginal “washings” with antiseptic solutions after which she noted that “Helena” was bleeding, which progressively got worse. Amorim put her in bed and administered “ergotina,” a\u00a0drug used in the past<\/a>\u00a0to stop post-partum and post-abortive hemorrhages. But the bleeding didn’t stop, and Figueiredo died. We will never know whether Figueiredo self-induced an abortion before she went to Amorim’s clinic or if Amorim herself conducted the procedure. Amorim clearly presented the story that would exculpate her from criminal suspicion.<\/p>\n

But this is not only or even mainly the story of Amorim. In fact, it is actually the story of Figueiredo, who went by the nickname Mena, and her boyfriend, Romeu. In the trial, the prosecution presented as evidence a handwritten note from Figueiredo to her boyfriend, Romeu. (Sometimes, you can’t make this stuff up.) This first-hand account of a woman’s reasons for seeking an abortion implies that honor and love influenced how she understood her reproductive decisions. Philomena suggests that Romeu had advised her to get an abortion, possibly in the hope of avoiding a scandal. Both were single; perhaps Romeu was unwilling to get married and take paternal responsibility. Perhaps Figueiredo also wanted to avoid having a child. While at Amorim’s clinic, Figueiredo allegedly told the midwife that fifteen days earlier she had “cut off relations” with him. Amorim also found a fan with the words “Romeu a primeira vez” (Romeu the first time) inscribed with ink. Figueiredo’s death remains a vivid reminder of how the criminalization of reproduction-here the illegality of abortion, which drove Philomena to an unlicensed and unsafe practitioner-had, and have, negative consequences for women. What are your first reactions after reading this note? How does Mena’s death demonstrate the idea that women bear the brunt of biological reproduction? If Romeu had written a response, what do you think he would have said?<\/p>\n

Source: Arquivo Nacional, Rio de Janeiro (AN) CS.0.PCR.4940 (1930)<\/p>\nTRANSCRIPTION<\/strong>
\nRomeu\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Fiz o que me aconselhaste fazer e o que devia fazer, n\u00e3o s\u00f3 porque n\u00e3o podia deixar apparecer vestigio de um amor illicito como tamb\u00e9m pelo grande amore que te consagro.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Sinto-me mal e talvez n\u00e3o sobreviva a ta manha amor e se assim f\u00f4r, pe\u00e7o te perdoar as innumeras faltas de quem s\u00f3 por amor assim as praticou, e n\u00e3o esquecer a memoria da tua [crossed out] que at\u00e9 na [crossed out] s\u00f3 a ti de corpo e alma peretnceu [sic] e que s\u00f3 tua ser\u00e1 at\u00e9 na eternidade<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Mena<\/p>\nTRANSLATION<\/strong>
\nRomeu\n

I did what you advised me to do and what I should have done, not only because I could not let the traces of an illicit love appear but also for the great love that we have consecrated.<\/p>\n

I feel unwell and I may not survive until tomorrow love and if not, I ask you to forgive the numerous mistakes that only one in love can make, and don’t forget the memory of your s[crossed out] that until the [crossed out] only to you, body and soul, I belonged, and only yours will I be even in the hereafter.<\/p>\n

Mena<\/p>\nFurther Reading
\n<\/strong>Ross, Loretta J., and Rickie Solinger.\u00a0Reproductive Justice: An Introduction<\/em>. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2017.\n

Roth, Cassia. “From Free Womb to Criminalized Woman: Fertility Control in Brazilian Slavery and Freedom.”\u00a0Slavery & Abolition<\/em>\u00a038, no. 2 (2017): 269-86.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\tStory of a Young Black Brazilian Woman<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tExpand<\/i><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t

Dr. Cassia Roth, University of Georgia<\/p>\nINTRODUCTION
\n<\/strong>As rare as it is for us to have access to women’s (and men’s) personal thoughts about their reproductive lives, it is even more rare for us to see what they look like. This photograph was part of the 1933 police investigation into the death of eighteen-year-old Mercedes dos Santos in the city of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Santos, a Black Brazilian woman (preta), died from a ruptured uterus and subsequent hemorrhage following an abortion. Santos was a domestic servant from the northeastern state of Bahia, and she worked in the home of another Black woman, Emilia Dias de Oliveira. Santos miscarried at Oliveira’s home, and she went to a public hospital when she began hemorrhaging. She died in the hospital. Although the forensic specialists were unable to determine if Santos had miscarried or if she had provoked an abortion, the police were quick to blame Oliveira for her death. Allegedly, on her deathbed, Santos had accused Oliveira of performing the abortion. Oliveira and her other employees, however, all expressed surprise that Mercedes had been pregnant in the first place. But without definitive forensic evidence of a provoked abortion, the police could not build a convincing case against Oliveira, and the justice system closed the investigation without any legal consequences for Oliveira.\n

\u00a0The tragic death of Mercedes dos Santos and the apparently unfounded accusation of Emilia Dias de Oliveira have everything to do with the color of their skin. Brazil was the last country in the Western Hemisphere to abolish slavery – in 1888 – and it imported nearly 5 million enslaved Africans between the early sixteenth century and the end of the slave trade in 1850. After abolition, the newly founded republican government did not implement any policies to integrate the formerly enslaved into the nation’s body politic. Poor Brazilians of African descent had worse literacy rates than their white counterparts, held lower-paying jobs, and faced worse health outcomes, including reproductive health indicators. Yet Brazil never implemented official segregation policies, and elites and the government put forth a theory of “racial democracy” that purported that the country’s longstanding history of racial mixing had led to a harmonious relationship between different races. This ideology both ignored the institutionalized rape inherent to chattel slavery and the underlying assumption that miscegenation would lead to a whiter, and thus “better, nation.<\/p>\n

Mercedes dos Santos typified, in many ways, young Afro-Brazilian women in the early twentieth century. She had migrated from a poorer region to the wealthier southeast, where she worked as a domestic servant. She lacked access to safe reproductive health services (although poor women of all races and colors did in the early 1930s), and her life was subject to more official scrutiny because of her poverty and skin color. What is important to note, however, is that Emilia Dias de Oliveira, also a Black woman migrant (from the neighboring state of Minas Gerais), despite her differential class status, also faced the same official scrutiny as the poorer Mercedes dos Santos. Oliveira had the financial means to employ at least two domestic servants (Santos and a second woman). Yet the police were quick to blame her for allegedly performing an abortion on Santos. In practice, a racial democracy seemed more racist than harmonious.<\/p>\n

Source:\u00a0Arquivo Nacional, Rio de Janeiro (AN), CT, Cx.2010 N. 535 (1933)<\/p>\nQuestions for Further Exploration:
\n<\/strong>Do you think that Mercedes dos Santos had an abortion, or did she die from complications related to a miscarriage? Does it matter? What initial reactions do you get from viewing the photograph of Santos? In what ways does this source help us understand the lives of women in a way that a written document can’t?\nFurther Reading
\n<\/strong>Adamo, Sam C. “The Broken Promise: Race, Health, and Justice in Rio de Janeiro, 1890-1940,” Phd Diss., University of New Mexico, 1983.\n

Alberto, Paulina L.\u00a0Terms of Inclusion: Black Intellectuals in Twentieth Century Brazil<\/em>. University of North Carolina Press, 2011.<\/p>\n

Otovo, Okezi T.\u00a0Progressive Mothers, Better Babies: Race, Public Health, and the State in Brazil, 1850-1945<\/em>. University of Texas Press, 2016.<\/p>\n

Skidmore, Thomas E.\u00a0Black into White: Race and Nationality in Brazilian Thought.<\/em>\u00a0Duke University Press, 1993.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\tLetter to a Midwife<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tExpand<\/i><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t

Dr. Cassia Roth, University of Georgia<\/p>\nINTRODUCTION
\n<\/strong>Historical sources on abortion and infanticide for the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries from women’s point of view are few and far between. Institutional medical sources, such as dissertations and texts, describe women as patients to be worked on. Although they are highly mediated documents, legal sources, particularly police investigations and criminal cases, bring us into the worlds of the women and men under scrutiny. In police precincts and court rooms, detectives and prosecutors controlled the questioning while scribes scribbled down answers, often haphazardly. This unequal power dynamic lent itself toward women adhering to the most convincing societal scripts. For example, women accused of infanticide in early twentieth-century Brazil often emphasized feelings of shame and dishonor as a driving factor behind their decisions. This reasoning followed the letter of the law, which reduced the sentence for infanticide if a woman had committed it “to hide her dishonor” (Article 298\u00a7, 1890 Penal Code<\/a>). But a careful reading of these same cases uncovers that women most often committed infanticide due to their impoverished status, and that they then understood and described their actions in a way the courts could understand.\n

At times, however, historians get a glimpse into why a woman had an abortion or how she felt about it. The police at times collected as evidence notes written from post-abortive women to their lovers, the midwives or physicians who performed the procedure, or to their friends. These first-hand accounts come to use through the mediation of a legal source, but they are first-hand accounts all the same.<\/p>\n

This note is one such instance. It is from a young woman, Isolina Castro Rio, to the midwife, “Madame Ely” in the city of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1929. Isolina had travelled roughly 100 miles from Nova-Friburgo, a small town in the interior of Rio de Janeiro state, to the capital city to get an abortion at Madame Ely’s clinic.<\/p>\n

\u00a0Madame Ely was Ely Waeger, a white Swedish immigrant. The fifty-five-year-old Waeger was married, literate, and a licensed midwife. Yet, the Rio de Janeiro police opened an investigation into her illegal abortion clinic after one of her patients, Celeste de Carvalho, died after a botched procedure in which Waeger had dilated her cervix and injected her with a Lysol solution. The investigation went to trial, and Waeger was charged under Brazil’s\u00a01890 Penal Code, Article 300\u00a71<\/a>: “to provoke an abortion, without or without the expulsion of the fruit of conception…[and] if in consequence of the abortion, or of the methods used to provoke it, the death of the woman follows.” Although initially found guilty, Waeger appealed, and the sentence was reduced. The case was eventually closed due to bureaucratic delays without Waeger ever going to prison.<\/p>\n

It appears that Castro Rio survived her abortion. Although the police tried to find her, she evaded judicial scrutiny and never faced legal consequences for her crime. Because Castro Rio was never questioned, we do not know much about her. However, the price she paid for her abortion, 250$000 milr\u00e9is, gives us a glimpse into her social status. In 1929, the monthly cost-of-living for basic foodstuffs only was slightly over 13$100 milr\u00e9is. That is to say, the abortion cost nineteen times what Castro Rio would have spent on food that month alone. Factor in the cost of traveling from Nova-Friburgo to Rio de Janeiro, and Castro Rio’s ability to rest in bed afterward, we can imagine that she came from the middling classes. Compare Castro Rio’s experience to that of Philomena Figueiredo. From the little we know of their abortions, what was similar? What was different? Both women had the means to pay a midwife and both were literate. In the end, does class matter if abortion is criminalized?<\/p>\n

Source: Arquivo Nacional, Rio de Janeiro (AN) CS.0.PCR.5608 (1930)<\/p>\nTRANSCRIPTION
\n<\/strong>Madame Ely. Escrevo estas linhas afim de dizer que tive o ab\u00f4rto hontem as 8 horas, n\u00e3o estou sentindo nada gra\u00e7as a Deus Pe\u00e7o o fav\u00f4r se alguem telephonar do Friburgo perguntando quanto \u00e9, a Snra faz o fav\u00f4r de diz\u00ear que a Senhora faz a opera\u00e7\u00e3o por 250$000 reis? O dinheiro eu levo segunda feira se Deus quizer, porque estou de cama.\n

Vossa humilde creada, Isolina Castro Rio, 10-10-1929<\/p>\nTRANSLATION
\n<\/strong>Madame Ely. I write these lines in order to say that I had the abortion yesterday at 8 o’clock, I’m not feeling anything, thank God. I ask the favor [that] if someone calls from Friburgo [state of Rio de Janeiro] asking how much it is, the Senhora [Lady] will do the favor of saying that the Lady does the operation for 250$000 r\u00e9is? The money I will bring on Monday, god willing, because I’m in bed. Your humble servant, Isolina Castro, Rio 10-10-1929.\nFurther Reading
\n<\/strong>Lahmeyer Lobo, Eul\u00e1lia Maria.\u00a0Hist\u00f3ria do Rio de Janeiro: do capital comercial ao capital industrial e financeiro<\/em>, vol. 2 (Rio de Janeiro: IBMEC, 1978), 748-81.\n

Rohden, Fab\u00edola.\u00a0A arte de enganar a natureza: contracep\u00e7\u00e3o, aborto e infantic\u00eddio no in\u00edcio do s\u00e9culo XX<\/em>. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Fiocruz, 2003.<\/p>\n

Roth, Cassia.\u00a0A Miscarriage of Justice: Women’s Reproductive Lives and the Law in Early Twentieth-Century Brazil<\/em>. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2020.<\/p>\n

Silva, Marinete dos Santos. “Reprodu\u00e7\u00e3o, sexualidade e poder: as lutas e disputas em torno do aborto e da contracep\u00e7\u00e3o no Rio de Janeiro, 1890-1930.”\u00a0Hist\u00f3ria, Ci\u00eancias, Sa\u00fade – Manguinhos<\/em>\u00a019, no. 4 (2012): 1241-54.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n\t

Mexico<\/strong><\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\tA Midwife Accused of Abortion, Yucat\u00e1n (1853)<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tExpand<\/i><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t

Dr. Nora Jaffary, Concordia University<\/p>\nINTRODUCTION
\n<\/strong>In this fascinating trial from Yucat\u00e1n, which opens in 1853, the state Superior Court (Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Yucat\u00e1n) rendered judgement on four indigenous women: Bernarda Sul\u00fa, accused of having supplied abortifacient drinks to Manuela Martin and Manuela Solis, as well as Nicolasa Martin, Manuela’s sister, accused of being an accomplice to her sister’s act of procuring an abortion. The case is interesting in terms of its provision of details about medical approaches to abortion in the mid-nineteenth century. The remedy that Sul\u00fa provided – an abortifacient drink – and in the case of Manuela Martin, the bleeding of her ankle, were approaches commonly used on both sides of the Atlantic in the Early Modern periods, and long after them, to provoke intentional miscarriages-the most common form of abortion before the twentieth century. The case is also interesting in terms of what it shows about the operation of mid-nineteenth century Mexican courts, their apprehension of justice served, and the legal foundation of the decisions judges and legal defenders might make. Notice that the two legal texts referred to in the case date from medieval Castile. Judges and defenders, while they used such legal theory, also referred to conditions specific to the setting of nineteenth-century Mexico when they discussed the particular legal considerations that should apply to members of indigenous communities in nineteenth-century Yucat\u00e1n. Readers of this case might consider the following questions: What did contemporaries consider the most vile aspects of abortion? What factors did they consider valid as extenuating circumstances that made the crime less atrocious? What picture does this trial allow you to form about the operation of criminal courts operating in Mexico in the nineteenth century?\n

The reader should be aware of a few translation details about this case. I have left the following terms in the original Spanish: se\u00f1or (sir or lord) and don (sir), both of which are awkwardly rendered in English translation. I also leave the term criatura in the original Spanish. This word, often translated as “baby” could in denote “fetus.” In this case, it seemed like too much of an editorial judgement to give the term one meaning or another because the two convey distinctive beings in English. Readers might also note that within the case itself, various officers of the court move back and forth between describing the crime for which these women were accused as “infanticide” and “abortion,” two acts that in our own setting would be understood as distinctive. Because the original text is over fifty folios in length, this transcription and translation is a selection of the complete dossier. When significant information was omitted from the original, it is summarized in italics. Much of what has not been reproduced from the original are administrative notes between different levels of the courts simply relaying the information that the file is moving between them.<\/p>\n

From the Archivo General del Estado de Yucat\u00e1n.<\/p>\nTRANSCRIPTION
\n<\/strong>Archivo General del Estado de Yucat\u00e1\u200bn\n

FONDO: Justicia<\/p>\n

SECCION: TRIBUNAL SUPERIOR DE JUSTICIA<\/p>\n

SERIE: PENAL<\/p>\n

SUBSERIE: HOMICIDIOS CALIFICADO.<\/p>\n

ASUNTO: CAUSA CONTRA BERNARDA SULU POR INFANTICIDIO, MANUELA SOLIS Y MANUELA MARTIN POR ABORTO VOLUNTARIO Y NICOLASA MARTIN POR COMPLICE DENUCIADO POR EL PROP. DON JOSE ESTEVAN PAREDES.<\/p>\n

LUGAR: MERIDA.<\/p>\n

FECHA: 12 DE SEPTIEMBRE DE 1853-07 DE DICIEMBRE DE 1857.<\/p>\n

FOJAS: 41<\/p>\n

OBSERVACIONES: DA\u00d1OS POR HUMEDAD, QUEMADURAS DE TINTA Y POLILLA.<\/p>\n

VOL. 70 EXP. 34<\/p>\n

[title page] M\u00e9rida 1853<\/p>\n

Criminal contra Bernarda Sul\u00fa por infanticidio, y Manuela Sol\u00eds y Manuela Mart\u00edn por aborto voluntario y Nicolasa Mart\u00edn por c\u00f3mplice.<\/p>\n

Jalapa<\/p>\n

1a Sala en [unknown word].<\/p>\n

No. 8 Marzo 8 de 854.<\/p>\n

2o cuaderno Sala 1a [4 firmas]<\/p>\n

[fol. 1] Tral Supr. De Just.a Trl. Pleno. M\u00e9rida Sbre 12 de 1853.<\/p>\n

Al S. [illegible], ministro en turno<\/p>\n

[firmas] Prejon Lic. Jos\u00e9 Ma Riviero Solis<\/p>\n

Tribunal Superior de Justicia Sala Segunda. M\u00e9rida Septiembre 13 de 1853<\/p>\n

Al se\u00f1or Fiscal<\/p>\n

[firma] Sr Rejon \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Lic. Marin<\/p>\n

Inmediatam.te noticie el auto anterior al lic. D. Guadalupe Martin Rosado, doy f\u00e9<\/p>\n

[firma] Patron<\/p>\n

En segunda notici\u00e9 el propio auto al lic. D. Esquino Castellano, doy f\u00e9.<\/p>\n

[firma] Patron<\/p>\n

[fol. 1v] Continuadm.te noticie el expresado auto al lic. D. Ricardo del Rio, doy f\u00e9.<\/p>\n

[firma] Patron<\/p>\n

Incontinente grave esta causa al S.or fiscal, doy fe.<\/p>\n

[firma] Patron<\/p>\n

Exmo. S.or<\/p>\n

El fiscal dice que iniciada esta causa en el pueblo de Chochol\u00e1 por denuncia del excelent\u00edsimo Pro. D. Jos\u00e9 Estevan Paredes sobre aborto que sospech\u00f3 habian cometido Man.la Martin y Manuela Solis, acab\u00f3 de instruirse ante el juez en turno de 1a insta de esta capital L D Mariano Brito.<\/p>\n

Seguida por todos eses tr\u00e1mites aparece Bernarda Sul\u00fa, por su confecion, como la principal autora de este crimen, que por su medio cometieron la Martin y la Solis.<\/p>\n

Man.la Martin esta confesa de haber pedido \u00e1 la Sul\u00fa llamada por su hermana Nicolaza para sangrarla los pies que ten\u00eda inflamados, sin remedio para librarse del estado de pre\u00f1ez en que se hallaba, con el fin de no sufrir el castigo que le daria su abuela descubierto su estado, mas esta mujer perversa, no solo accedi\u00f3 a dar el brebaje por dos veces, sin\u00f3 aplic\u00f3 tamb.n por iguales ocasiones la sangria hta conseguir su criminal objeto, no obstante que debia presumir por su avanzada edad y practica, estar animada la criatura atento el poco tiempo que deb\u00eda faltarle para el alumbram.to natural.<\/p>\n

Mucho m\u00e1s criminal es esta misma mujer cuando habiendose metido \u00e1 conversar con Manuela Solis, \u00e9 indagado su estado cuando le manifest\u00f3 aquella el temor, que tenia del castigo de sus padres si supieran su embarazo, voluntariam.te le ofreci\u00f3 el brevaje que en efecto le di\u00f3 tambi\u00e9n por dos veces y que tubo el exito q.e en la Martin, calmando de aquella manera los temores de la Solis. Esta confesa esta de haber tomado la pocion y por consecuencia haber abortado \u00e1 un ni\u00f1o ya animado. Si pues son reos de aborto voluntario Man.la Martin y Man.la Solis, Bernarda Sul\u00fa lo es de doble feticidio porque ha hecho abortar \u00e1 dos criaturas que segun la opini\u00f3n de la R. Junta facultativa de medicina [fol 2] y cirug\u00eda estaban animadas, estando adem\u00e1s el abortado por la Martin en estado viable.<\/p>\n

Tambi\u00e9n figura en esta causa como c\u00f3mplice Nicolaza Martin por haber ido a llamar \u00e1 Bernarda Sul\u00fa para sangrar \u00e1 su hermanita Manuela p.r la inflamacion de pies de que adolecia pero no habiendo tenido otro m\u00f3vil que la sanidad de aquella, ignorando la verdadera causa de su enfermedad y no habiendo sabido del brevaje administrado ni el aborto seguido; aunque la Sul\u00fa en un caso le sostuvo que ante ella le manifesto su hermanita el estado en que se hallaba, siendo probable que se expresase asi por despecho de verse en manos de la justicia, cuando en la declaracion que di\u00f3 en su pueblo nada de esto dijo: siendo tambien la \u00fanica atestacion que hay contra ella, no puede por esta causa repurtarsela complice.<\/p>\n

El crimen pues que nos ocupa es de bastante gravedad y su castigo de suma importancia; porque ha privado de la existencia \u00e1 dos s\u00e9res inocentes que deb\u00edan hacer parte de la sociedad en que vivimos, la que altamente ofendida en su moral exige del mismo modo el castigo de las reos. La ley 2a y 3a del tit 4o del libro 6o del Fuero juzgo castiga al que comete este horrendo crimen con la pena de muerte en el caso de que la que abort\u00f3 muera mas no muriendo impone pena pecuniaria mayor \u00f3 menor seg\u00fan q. el ni\u00f1o estaba \u00f3 no formado.<\/p>\n

El inferior no obstante apoyarse en las ls. 8 y 12 del tit.o 8o de la 1a partida que se\u00f1alan la pena de muerte teniendo en consideracion la crasa ignorancia en que se hallan las procesadas conden\u00f3 \u00e1 Bernarda Sul\u00fa \u00e1 ocho a\u00f1os de servicios forzados \u00e1 Man.la Solis \u00e1 cinco a\u00f1os y \u00e1 Nicolaza Martin \u00e1 dos a\u00f1os de los propios servicios en el hospital de esta ciudad.<\/p>\n

En concepto del que suscribe es demasiado severo aquel fallo y pide \u00e1 V.E. se sirva reformarlo condenando \u00e1 la primera \u00e1 seis a\u00f1os \u00e1 la segunda \u00e1 tres y \u00e1 la tercera \u00e1 4 a\u00f1os de dichos servicios; dando \u00e1 la ultima por compurgada su culpabilidad con el tiempo de prisi\u00f3n sufrida. Merida y Septiembre 21 de 1853.<\/p>\n

[firma]Lic Jos\u00e9 Vicente Sol\u00eds<\/p>\n

[fol.2v] Tribunal Superior de Justicia Sala Segunda. M\u00e9rida Septiembre 21 de 1853<\/p>\n

Traslada<\/p>\n

[firmas] Sr. Rejon\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Lic. Marin<\/p>\n

Inmediat.mte impuse del auto ant.r al Sr. fiscal. Doy Fe.<\/p>\n

[firma] Roche<\/p>\n

Seguidamente entregu\u00e9 esta causa al Lic. Ricardo Rio, doy fe.<\/p>\n

[firma] Roche<\/p>\n

[fol. 3] Tribunal Superior de Justicia Sala Segunda M\u00e9rida Octubre 14 de 1853. No habiendo el defensor de Manuela y Nicolasa Martin p.r infanticidio evacuado el traslado que al efecto se le ocurri\u00f3, desde luego habiendo transcurrido ventajosamente el t\u00e9rmino, el Notario de diligencias proceder\u00e1 \u00e1 extraer la referida causa. Testado. Bernarda Sul\u00fa y socios= no vale = Entre reglones = Manuela y Nicolasa Mart\u00edn = vale.<\/p>\n

[firmas] Estrada \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Lic. Pedro Marcelino Marin<\/p>\n

Inmediam.te inpone del auto anterior al S.or fiscal, doy fe.<\/p>\n

[firma] Roche<\/p>\n

En seguida notifiqu\u00e9 al propio fallo auto al lic. D. Ricardo Rio y dejo que por las ocurrencias de esta ciudad no pueda despacharse su alegato y me lo escribi\u00f3 con la causa que se reclama, doy fe.<\/p>\n

firmas] Lic. Rio\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Roche<\/p>\n

[fol.4] Ex.mo Sor.<\/p>\n

El defensor de Manuela y Nicolasa Martin en la causa que se sigue a la primera por aborto voluntario y \u00e1 la segunda por presumida complice en el mismo delito a V.E. con el respecto que corresponde expone: Que sin embargo de las razones poderosisimas que en primera instancia aleg\u00f3 para que se impusiere \u00e1 la pral. de sus patrocinadas una pena moderada porque las reflecciones que tiene hecho asi lo piden; y a la segunda en virtud de no estar justificada su complicidad se le diese por expiado cualquier indicio que contra ella pudiese resultar, el inferior les impuso la pena que se advierte de la sentencia en revision cuya severidad al mismo s.or ministro fiscal ha conocido pidiendo ser reformado, aplicando \u00e1 Manuela cuatro a\u00f1os de servicios interior en el Hospital de San Juan de Dios de esta Ciudad relevando \u00e1 Nicolasa de ulterior pena.<\/p>\n

El que habla, que no obstante esta reforma, conoce cierta desigualdad en las penas, porque \u00e1 Manuela Sol\u00eds se impone tres a\u00f1os de servicios sin embargo de estar con la Martin en igualdad de circunstancias, sin que en su concepto pueda ser la razon de esta desigualdad el haber estado la Martin m\u00e1s proxima al parto, porque en estos casos solo se debe atenderse si estaba animado el feto.<\/p>\n

A V. E. ocurre suplicando se sirva revocar la sentencia del inferior condenando a Manuela Martin \u00e1 tres a\u00f1os de servicio interior en el hospital de San Juan de Dios [fol. 4v] de esta ciudad dando \u00e1 Nicolasa Martin de conformidad en el pedimiento del Sr. ministro fiscal, por compurgada su falta con el tiempo de prision sufrida, todo en fuerza de las razones que tiene alegadas y que aqu\u00ed relata. Es justicia que pide con el juramento necesario. M\u00e9rida 15 de Obre. 1853<\/p>\n

[firma] Ricardo Rio<\/p>\n

Ynmediatam.te entregu\u00e9 esta causa al. Lic. D. Regiano Castellanos, doy f\u00e9<\/p>\n

[firma]\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Roche<\/p>\n

Nota: q. con esta fha. el Not.o D.n Eugenio del Rosario Patron me entreg\u00f3 este causa [illegible Word] haberselo dado Dn Regiano Castellanos alegando no poderla despacho por enfermo. M\u00e9rida 26 Oct. 1853.<\/p>\n

[firma]Rio<\/p>\n

[fol. 5] Tribunal Superior de Justicia. Sala Segunda M\u00e9rida, Octubre 31 de 1853.<\/p>\n

Vista la nota que antecede, nombrase defensor de Manuela Sol\u00eds al Prof. Dn Carlos Pinelo, a quien se entregar\u00e1 la causa en traslado, previo el correspondiente juramento que prestar\u00e1 en primera audiencia.<\/p>\n

[firmas] Brejon \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Lic. Pedro Marcelino Mar\u00edn<\/p>\n

En seguida inpone del auto ant.r al Prof.r D Carlos Pinelo; doy f\u00e9.<\/p>\n

[firma] Pinelo \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Rio<\/p>\n

Certifico: que con \u00e9sta fecha se present\u00f3 en esta Srio. el Prof. D.n Carlos Pinelo y prest\u00f3 el juramento prevenido en el auto que antecede. M\u00e9rida Noviembre 2 de 1853.<\/p>\n

[firmas] Carlos Pinelo \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Lic. Pedro Marcelino Martin<\/p>\n

En seguida para esta causa al Prof.r D.n Carlos Pinelo de que doy f\u00e9.<\/p>\n

[firma] Rio<\/p>\n

[fol. 6]<\/p>\n

Ex.mo Sr.<\/p>\n

Carlos Pinelo, defensor de Manuela Solis en la causa que se le sigue por aborto voluntario, a V.E. con el mas profundo respeto expongo: que despues de las razones vertidas por el defensor de 1a instan.a en que manifiesta la graduacion de culpabilidad que debe hacerse respecto de mi patrocinada, por aplicarle la pena en virtud de las circunstancias atenuantes, que obran \u00e1 favor de ella; solamente pasar\u00e9 \u00e1 demostrar, que no solo debe aplicarse una pena muy severa, por la gravedad de circunstancias que envuelve en si un delito, sino que debe atenderse siempre a la persona que lo comete, investigando, si esta, es \u00f3 ha sido de buena \u00f3 mala conducta, si, es ignorante \u00f3 ilustrada, para formar un juicio exacto, de la maldad en el crimen, \u00f3 de la malicia q.e hubiese puesto al cometer el crimen porque si fuese de alta cuna \u00e9 ilustrada, \u00bfQui\u00e9n ha dicho que una joven de alta sociedad, seria mas disculpable, si para conservar lo ilustrado de su nombre y honra cometiese un crimen tan horrendo? \u00a1Oh! Destino por modo; porque que tal procedese seria m\u00e1s criminal \u00e1 la vista de la ley, aun considerando que dicha joven hubiese sido descuidada de su educaci\u00f3n por siendo ilustrada merecer\u00eda todo el rigor de la ley, en atenci\u00f3n \u00e1 que sabe el detestable [fol. 6 v] delito que consuma, por otra parte si la suponemos con recursos, puede valerse de otros medios, para ocultar el fruto de su amor ilicito, sin consumar el odioso crimen que nos ocupa. Tal es Exm.o Sr. la descomparza q.e se ha querido haser valer en 1a insta al pedir una pena tan exorbitante para mi defendida.<\/p>\n

Esta sin instruccion, sin principios si se quiere, demuestra religion, esto es, sumida en la mas crasa ignorancia, por no saber si el acto que cometi\u00f3, era, \u00f3 no un crimen; es mas bien digna de correccion, que de un fuerte castigo; porque si la confesion hace prueba plena, esta suele suceder que sea un indicio cierto para purgar, que aquel hecho que se cometi\u00f3, se ignoraba, y por este motivo se confes\u00f3; y como en estas circunstancias se halla mi defendida, que ha sido condenada a cinco a\u00f1os de servicio por el juez infor. En este concepto a V.E. pido, y suplico se sirva revocar dicha sentencia, condenando \u00e1 mi patrocinada \u00e1 dos a\u00f1os de dichos servicios por ser asi de justicia que pido con el juramento de la ley. M\u00e9rida. Nbre 7, 1853.<\/p>\n

[Firma] Carlos Pinelo<\/p>\n

En Merida a nueve de dicho mes y a\u00f1o pas\u00e9 esta causa al lic. Dn Guadalupe Martin Rosado. Doy fe = Encomendado = Guadalupe= vale<\/p>\n

[firma] Rio<\/p>\n

[fol. 7]<\/p>\n

Exc.mo Se\u00f1or<\/p>\n

El defensor de Bernarda Sul\u00fa en la causa que se le sigue por haber administrado brebaje para abortar, \u00e1 Manuela Martin y Manuela Sol\u00eds, con el debido respeto ante V. E. expone: que teniendo en justa consideraci\u00f3n las atenuantes circunstancias que obran en favor de la Sul\u00fa, las mismas que alegu\u00e9 en 1a instancia, el Sr. Fiscal halla severo el fallo de inferior, que condena \u00e1 la patrocinada del que suscribe \u00e1 ocho a\u00f1os de servicios forzados en el Hospital de esta Ciudad, siendo de sentir que solo debe ser condenada \u00e1 seis. Esta reforma, que pide el Sr. Fiscal, es en concepto del defensor de la Sul\u00fa muy equitativa, mitigado como se halla el demasiado rigor de las penas que impon\u00eda la antigua legislaci\u00f3n, rigor que v\u00e1 caducando en casi todos los paises civilizados, merced \u00e1 la suavidad de las [fol. 7v] costumbres, que hoy no son como ent\u00f3nces, b\u00e1rbaras y cru\u00ebles.<\/p>\n

Por lo tanto, el defensor de la repetida Sul\u00fa, que no est\u00e1 sino por el rigor, ni porque queden impunes los delitos, hallando bastante arreglada la reforma que solicita el Sr. Fiscal, desde luego ocurra. A V.E. pidi\u00e9ndole se digne revocar el fallo del inferior conforme al pedimento fiscal, refiri\u00e9ndose solo como debe referirse \u00e1 su patrocinada, p.a quien pide gracia con el juramento. Merida, Nov. 22 de 1853.<\/p>\n

[firma] Guadalupe M.n Rosado.<\/p>\n

Nota: que p.r haberse entregado despues del despacho no se provey\u00f3 hoy esta causa. M\u00e9rida 22 de Nov.e de 1853.<\/p>\n

[Firma] Rio<\/p>\n

[fol. 8] Tribunal Superior de Justicia Sala Segunda. M\u00e9rida, Noviembre 23 de 1853.<\/p>\n

D\u00e9se cuenta al primer d\u00eda \u00fatil.<\/p>\n

[firma] Lic. Marin.<\/p>\n

En seguida hice saber el auto anterior al Sr. Fiscal, de q.e doy fe.<\/p>\n

[firma] Rio<\/p>\n

Segunda.te impone del mismo auto a al Lic.do Don Ricardo del Rio de que doy f\u00e9.<\/p>\n

[firma]\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Lic. Rio<\/p>\n

En M\u00e9rida a veinte y cuatro de dicho mes y a\u00f1o hice saber el mismo auto al Prof.r Dn Carlos Pinelo, de que doy f\u00e9<\/p>\n

[firmas]\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Pinelo \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Rio<\/p>\n

Continuadamente impuse del mismo auto al Lic. D.n Guadalupe Martin Rosado, de q.e doy fe<\/p>\n

[firmas] Lic. Rosado \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Rio<\/p>\n

[fol. 8v] Considerando ser algo ecsesiva la pena impuesta p.r el inferior \u00e1 la rea de \u00e9sta causa, asi como que contra Nicolasa Martin solo existe una presuncion de complicidad, la cual se conceptua suficientemente compurgada con la prision sufrida; desde luego se reforma la sentencia que pronunci\u00f3 el indicado Juez, condenandose \u00e1 Bernarda Sul\u00fa \u00e1 seis a\u00f1os de servicios forzados, \u00e1 Manuela Martin \u00e1 cuatro a\u00f1os de los mismos servicios y \u00e1 Manuela Sol\u00eds \u00e1 tres a\u00f1os de la misma pena con destino al Hospital Gral. de S. Juan de Dios de esta Ciudad, declarandose suficientemente compurgada la presuncion que obra contra Nicolasa Martin con el tiempo de prision sufrida, y dandose cuenta al Exmo. Tral. Pleno p.a la correspondiente revision y dirigiendose previamente oficio al inferior p.a que bajo la correspondiente cauci\u00f3n ponga en libertad \u00e1 la referida Nicolasa Martin, M\u00e9rida Dbre. 17 de 1853=Testado=y=no vale.<\/p>\n

[firma]<\/p>\n

Lic. Mar\u00edn<\/p>\n

En [fol. 9] La ciudad de M\u00e9rida Capital de Yucat\u00e1n \u00e1 los diez y siete d\u00edas del mes de Diciembre de mil ochocientos cincuenta y tres a\u00f1os, el infrascrito secretario da cuenta al se\u00f1or Dn Isidro Bejon, Ministro en turno de la Sala Segunda del Esmo. Tral. Superior de Justicia, causa segunda en el Juzgado de primera instancia de capital contra Bernarda Sul\u00fa, Manuela Martin y Manuela Sol\u00eds por aborto y Nicolasa Martin por complice; y habiendo visto las declaraciones y ratificaciones de los testigos, los instructivos y confesiones de las reos, lo alegado por sus defensores y la sentencia que pronunci\u00f3 el Juez de 1a instancia Lic. D.n Mariano Brito el diez de setiembre \u00faltimo, en que condena a Bernarda Sul\u00fa a ocho a\u00f1os de servicios forzados en el hospital de esta ciudad, \u00e1 Manuela Martin \u00e1 seis a\u00f1os en el propio lugar, \u00e1 Manuela Sol\u00eds \u00e1 cinco a\u00f1os en el mismo destino y \u00e1 Nicolasa Martin \u00e1 dos a\u00f1os en el referido Hospital: visto as\u00ed mismo lo pedido por el Se\u00f1or Fiscal y lo contestado por los defensores al traslado que se los mand\u00f3 dar en \u00e9sta segunda inst.a, con cuanto mas se tubo presente y ver convino Su Excelencia dijo: que considerando ser algo ecsesiva la pena impuesta por el inferior a las reos de esta causa asi como que contra Nicolasa Martin solo existe una presuncion de complicidad, la cual se conceptua suficientemente compurgada con la prisi\u00f3n sufrida; desde luego deb\u00eda reformar y reforma la expresada sentencia del inferior condenandose \u00e1 Bernarda Sul\u00fa \u00e1 seis a\u00f1os de servicios forzados, \u00e1 Manuela Martin \u00e1 cuatro a\u00f1os y \u00e1 Manuela Sol\u00eds \u00e1 tres a\u00f1os de la misma [fol 9v] pena con destino al Hospital Gral. de San Juan de Dios de esta Ciudad, declar\u00e1ndose suficientemente compurgada la presunci\u00f3n que obra contra Nicolasa Martin con el tiempo de prision sufrida d\u00e1ndose cuenta al Ex.mo Tral. Pleno para la correspondiente y dirigiendo previamente oficio al inferior para que bajo la correspondiente caucion ponga en libertad \u00e1 la referida Nicolasa Martin. Y por este que su Excelencia provey\u00f3 asi lo mand\u00f3 y firm\u00f3 lo que certific\u00f3=Testado=por=no vale<\/p>\n

[firmas] Ysidro Piejon \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Lic. Pedro Marcelino Marin<\/p>\n

En el acta hice saber la sentencia q.e precede el Sr. Fiscal de q.e doy f\u00e9.<\/p>\n

[firma] Rio<\/p>\n

Continuadamente hice saber la propia sentencia al Prof.r D.n Carlos Pinelo, de q.e doy f\u00e9.<\/p>\n

[firmas]<\/p>\n

Pinelo\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Rio<\/p>\n

[fol. 10]<\/p>\n

Seguida, hise saber la misma sentencia al Lic.do D.n Guadalupe Martin Rosado y dijo quedar enterado de que doy f\u00e9.<\/p>\n

[firmas]<\/p>\n

Lic. Rosado\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Rio<\/p>\n

En Merida \u00e1 diez y nueve de dicho mes y a\u00f1o hice saber la propia sentencia al Lic. D.n Ricardo Rio, de que doy f\u00e9.<\/p>\n

[firma]\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Rio<\/p>\n

Nota: que con \u00e9sta fecha dirig\u00ed al inferior el oficio que proviene el fallo q.e antecede. M\u00e9rida, diciembre 19 de 1853<\/p>\n

[firma]\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Lic. Mar\u00edn<\/p>\n

Tral. Sup.r de Justicia. Trial. Pleno. Merida 20 de D.bre de 1853. A la sala primera.<\/p>\n

[firmas]<\/p>\n

Rej\u00f3n\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Lic. Jos\u00e9 M.a Rivero Sol\u00eds<\/p>\n

[10v] Tr.al Sup.r de Justicia Sala primera M\u00e9rida 20 de diciembre de 1853.<\/p>\n

Licenciado Rivera Sol\u00eds<\/p>\n

(Firma)<\/p>\n

En seguida hice saber el auto anterior al Licenciado Don Guadalupe Martin Rosado de que doy fe.<\/p>\n

Licenciado Rosado<\/p>\n

(Firma)<\/p>\n

Rio<\/p>\n

(Firma)<\/p>\n

Continuadamente hice notorio el auto anterior al Profesor Don Carlos Pinelo y dijo quedar dispuesto de que doy fe.<\/p>\n

Rio<\/p>\n

(Firmas)<\/p>\n

Pinelo<\/p>\n

(Firmas)<\/p>\n

Continuadamente hace saber el auto anterior al Licenciado Don Ricardo Rio, de que doy fe.<\/p>\n

Rio (Firmas)<\/p>\n

Seguidamente puse esta causa al se\u00f1or fiscal, de que doy fe.<\/p>\n

Rio<\/p>\n

(Firmas)<\/p>\n

[fol 11]<\/p>\n

Sor.<\/p>\n

El fiscal dice que esta causa seguida contra Bernarda Sul\u00fa por doble feticidio, contra Manuela Solis y Manuela Martin por aborto voluntario y Nicolaza Martin por c\u00f3mplice en estos delitos ha venido a VE en revisi\u00f3n del fallo que pronunci\u00f3 la Exma. Sala 2.a el d\u00eda 17 del presente reformando la sentencia del inferior condenando \u00e1 Bernarda Sul\u00fa seis a\u00f1os de trabajos forzaos en el hospital gral. De S. Juan de Dios de esta ciudad en el departamento de mujeres, \u00e1 Manuela Martin \u00e1 cuatro a\u00f1os de los mismos servicios y \u00e1 Manuela Solis \u00e1 tres a\u00f1os de la misma pena que sufrir\u00e1n tambi\u00e9n estas dos \u00faltimas en el propio lugar que la primera y declarando suficientemente compurgada la presunci\u00f3n que obra contra Nicolaza Martin con el tiempo de prision que lleva sufrida mand\u00e1ndola poner en consecuencia en libertad bajo de fianza. Este fallo superior est\u00e1 de conformidad con la petici\u00f3n del que habla del 21 de set.e ultimo reproduciendo aqu\u00ed sus fundamentos; advirtiendo \u00fanicamente que por la causa que despach\u00f3 antier seguida en el juz.do de 1.a inst.a de este Dist.o contra Cristanto Vical y socios es manifiesto que la Sul\u00fa se fug\u00f3 de la prision y as\u00ed pide a VE se sirva comprimar el fallo de la Esma Sala con respecto \u00e1 las tres \u00faltimas dejando suspensa la la causa respecto de la primera, previo oficio que se pase al inferior para que manifieste si aun continua a pr\u00f3fuga y en caso contrario hacer estemsova hasta ella la confirmaci\u00f3n de dicho auto. M\u00e9rida y dic.e 22 de 1853.<\/p>\n

[firma]\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Lic. Jos\u00e9 Vicente Solis.<\/p>\n

[skipped some notations indicating just that the order went back to the inferior court]<\/p>\n

Fol. 12 – Sul\u00fa’s defender – just asks to confirm her reduced sentence even though she has escaped from prison.<\/p>\n

[fol. 13] Exmo. Sr.<\/p>\n

Carlos Pinelo, defensor de Manuela Solis, ante VE con el mayor respecto expongo: q.e las circunstancias que obran en la causa no son tan graves para aplicar \u00e1 mi patrocinada a una pena de tres a\u00f1os, como la que ha impuesto la Exma. Sala 2.a pues atendidas, veremos, q.e ella aun obr\u00f3 con inocensia, al ponerse en cura instigada por la Sul\u00fa; \u00e1 que se agrega tambi\u00e9n la declaraci\u00f3n de la junta facultativa en la q. aparese, haber sido el feto de mi defendida de tres \u00e1 cuatro meses, y no encontrarse en un estado viable; lo cual no sucedi\u00f3 con la Martin, pues ad\u00e9mas de la premeditaci\u00f3n con que cometi\u00f3 el crimen, resulta por la misma declaraci\u00f3n \u00e1 fs. 19 que el feto de ella era de siete meses, y estas circunstancias, y las razones q.e tengo alegadas en 2.a inst.a que doy por reproducidas aqu\u00ed y por no encontrar proporci\u00f3n tambi\u00e9n en las penas interpuestas por la Exma. Sala 2.a con arreglo aquella circunstancias.<\/p>\n

A VE le pido, y suplico se sirva reformar aquel fallo, condenando \u00e1 mi defendida \u00e1 dos a\u00f1os de servicios en el Hospital por ser justicia q.e pido, con el juramento necesario. M\u00e9rida Enero 11 1854.<\/p>\n

[firma]\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Carlos Pinelo<\/p>\n

[fol.14 – someone writes that they had managed to reclaim Bernarda who was in her own neighbourhood but she escaped a 2nd time!]<\/p>\n