Read Online Ebony and Ivy by Craig Steven Wilder - Free Book Online Page B

compromise. The child’s hair and complexion suggested that Whistelo was not the father, he stated, but her “thick lips and flat nose are the indication of the father’s being an African.” Samuel Mitchill was more adamant, insisting that it was not only possible but probable that Whistelo was the father. A professor at Columbia and a professor of natural history and botany at Physicians and Surgeons, Mitchill argued that the earlier testimony treated skin color as too stable and predictable a characteristic. Miller and Mitchill were colleagues. A 1789 graduate of the medical program at Pennsylvania, Miller had even coauthored an address to physicians with Mitchill. 3 Now the pair united to provide enough doubt to continue the proceedings.
    Confused by the child’s complexion and the contradictory expert testimony, the magistrates and the attorneys agreed to have the case heard anew before a panel comprising Mayor DeWitt Clinton, the city recorder, and three aldermen. Beginning August 18, 1808, the mayor’s court took direct testimony from Lucy Williams. The prominent physician Benjamin Kissam, who had studied medicine at Edinburgh and founded the New York Academy of Sciences, informed the judges that, after “examining those parts of the child which particularly indicate the color of the race,” he did not believe this to be the child of a black man. Dr. Kissam was sure that the child’s father had to be white. 4
    The court combed the mid-Atlantic colleges for race experts. David Hosack returned. He assured the judges that the laws of nature negated the possibility of Whistelo being the father of the child. Despite his broad training in Atlantic science, Hosack had his conclusions rigorously challenged as the almshouse’s lawyer tried to limit the damage of his testimony. Asked if “irritation, terror, or surprise” at the moment of conception could have altered the appearance of the child, the professor dismissed this possibility. Asked if albinism might explain the child’s light appearance, Hosack rejected this suggestion. The surgeon Wright Post defended Hosack’s position. “There were instances of black men with black women producing children as fair as this,” he allowed, “but they were exceptions to the general laws of nature.” The court then heard from the doctor credited with introducing vaccination to New York City.Valentine Seaman graduated from Pennsylvania’s medical school and was an expert on childbirth and midwifery. He was a particularly strong defense witness. A surgeon at New York Hospital, he also served as the visiting physician for pregnant women confined at the almshouse. Dr. Seaman concurred with the majority, concluding that Whistelo could not be the father of Williams’s child. 5
    Five of the
Whistelo
witnesses had studied at Edinburgh, and most were corresponding members of British medical and science societies, which circulated much of the available literature on race and forensic medicine. Andrew Duncan had used his chair in the institutions of medicine at Edinburgh to enact a series of lectures on forensics, provide medical testimony in criminal and civil cases, and conduct medical investigations for courts. As Duncan explained:
    Many questions come before courts of justice, where the opinion of medical practitioners is necessary either for the exculpation of innocence, or the detection of guilt. In many cases, on their judgment, questions respecting the liberty and property of individuals must be determined by the civil magistrate.
    In 1792 Duncan published his lectures on medicine and law, which included lessons on pregnancy and childbirth. Additionally, the Edinburgh medical curriculum had been published years before the trial. The series had comprehensive volumes on dissection and anatomy, including material on human genitalia and the reproductive process. 6
    Dominated by Edinburgh graduates and affiliates,