III. In a case of necessity, a laparotomy to remove an ectopic fetus from the mother is licit, provided the lives of both mother and fetus are, so far as is possible, carefully and opportunely preserved.[96]

March 5, 1902, this question was asked the Holy Office: "Is it ever licit to remove an ectopic fetus from the mother while the fetus is under six months of age from the time of conception?"

The answer was: "Negatively, in accord with the decree of May 4, 1898, by which the lives of the fetus and mother, as far as possible, are carefully and opportunely preserved. As to the time, the questioner is reminded by the same decree that no premature delivery is licit unless effected at the time and by the methods which, under ordinary circumstances, will preserve the lives of mother and fetus."

The English civil law concerning abortion[97] is:

"Whoever shall unlawfully supply or procure any poison or other noxious thing, or any instrument or thing whatsoever, knowing that the same is intended to be unlawfully used or employed with intent to procure the miscarriage of any woman, whether she be or be not with child, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be kept in penal servitude for the term of three years, or to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years, with or without hard labor."

Alfred Susaine Taylor,[98] commenting on this law, said: "Strictly speaking, there is no such thing as justifiable abortion; the law recognizes no such possibility. A medical man must always remember this when he contemplates emptying a pregnant uterus.

"It is obvious that the only reasons that can be thought of by an honorable man as justifying the induction of labor are (1) to save the life of the mother; (2) to save the life of the child. (Some religions will not contemplate the first reason, but that we are not now concerned with.) It cannot be done for the sake of family honor nor for any similar ethical reason....

"The golden rule is never to empty a uterus without first having a second professional opinion as to its necessity; if this opinion be adverse, do not do it; if it be favorable, it is well to get it in writing, and it is well also to get the written or attested consent of the woman and her husband, and then proceed to do it with all the skill and care possible. The death of the fetus is at any time the most certain means of causing the womb to empty itself, but after the sixth month the operation is performed necessarily with a view to preserving this life, and steps must be taken accordingly." Coke, about 1615, judged that to kill a child in the womb is not murder, but if it is expelled by violence and dies after it leaves the womb, that is murder.

The law in Pennsylvania[99] is: "If any person, with intent to procure the miscarriage of any woman, shall unlawfully administer to her any poison, drug, or substance whatsoever, or shall unlawfully use any instrument, or other means whatsoever, with the like intent, such person shall be guilty of felony, and being thereof convicted, shall be sentenced to pay a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars, and undergo an imprisonment, by separate or solitary confinement at labor, not exceeding three years." It makes no difference in Pennsylvania law whether the child is quickened or not.

The New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Wisconsin laws are like the Pennsylvania law. The law in Iowa[100] is: "If any person, with intent to procure the miscarriage of any pregnant woman, wilfully administer to her any drug or substance whatever, or, with such intent, use any instrument or other means whatever, unless such miscarriage shall be necessary to save her life, he shall be imprisoned in the penitentiary for a term not exceeding five years, and be fined in a sum not exceeding one thousand dollars." To the same effect are the laws in Connecticut, Maine, New York, Ohio, Michigan, Minnesota, Colorado, Texas, and Maryland.