1. Kaczorowski, Robert J., “To Begin the Nation Anew: Congress, Citizenship, and Civil Rights after the Civil War,” The American Historical Review 92 (Feb. 1987): 45–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Foner, Eric, Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution (New York: Harper and Row, 1988)Google Scholar ; Novak, William J., The People's Welfare: Law and Regulation in Nineteenth-Century America (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1996)Google Scholar ; Amar, Akhil Reed, The Bill of Rights: Construction and Reconstruction (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998)Google Scholar ; Stanley, Amy Dru, From Bondage to Contract: Wage Labor, Marriage, and the Market in the Age of Slave Emancipation (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; and Welke, Barbara Young, Recasting American Liberty: Gender, Race, Law, and the Railroad Revolution, 1865–1920 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001)Google Scholar.

2. There is a vast literature about children's rights as a legal and philosophical concept. For a good overview of this literature see Minow, Martha, “Interpreting Rights: An Essay for Robert Cover,” Yale Law Journal 96 (July 1987): 1860–1915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar In this essay, I work from Minow's idea that “rights represent articulations—public or private, formal or informal—of claims that people use to persuade others (and themselves) about how they should be treated and about what they should be granted”(1867).

3. Scholars generally cite Brown v. the Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954), as the first decision to recognize a substantive right for children and In Re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967), as the first decision to recognize a child's right to due process protection. See, for example, Glennon, Theresa and Schwartz, Robert G., “Foreword: Looking Back, Looking Ahead: The Evolution of Children's Rights,” Temple Law Review 68 (Winter 1995): 1557–72.Google Scholar Barbara Bennett Woodhouse, however, contends that the first children's rights cases were actually brought by African Americans at the turn of the twentieth century to challenge the constitutionality of school segregation laws. Woodhouse, , “Who Owns the Child? Meyer and Pierce and Children as Property,” William and Mary Law Review 33 (Summer 1992): 1058–59Google Scholar.

4. Hawes, Joseph M., The Children's Rights Movement: A History of Advocacy and Protection (Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1991)Google Scholar and Mason, Mary Ann, From Father's Property to Children's Rights: The History of Child Custody in the United States (New York: Columbia University Press, 1994)Google Scholar.

5. See, for example, Minow, Martha, “Children's Rights: Where We've Been, and Where We're Going,” Temple Law Review 68 (Winter 1995): 1573–84Google Scholar and Woodhouse, “Who Owns the Child?” For excellent analyses of how conceptions of children have shaped American child welfare policy, juvenile justice, and immigration law, see Grossberg, Michael, “Changing Conceptions of Child Welfare in the United States, 1820–1935,” in A Century for Juvenile Justice, ed. Rosenheim, Margaret K. et al. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002), 3–41Google Scholar ; Scott, Elizabeth S., “The Legal Construction of Childhood,” in A Century of Juvenile Justice, 113–41Google Scholar ; and Thronson, David B., “Kids Will Be Kids? Reconsidering the Conceptions of Children's Rights Underlying Immigration Law,” Ohio State Law Journal 63 (2002): 979–1016Google Scholar.

6. On the concept of social citizenship in the context of American history, see Gordon, Linda, Pitied But Not Entitled: Single Mothers and the History of Welfare (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1994)Google Scholar and Katz, Michael B., The Price of Citizenship: Redefining the American Welfare State (New York: Metropolitan, 2001)Google Scholar.

7. Novak, , The People's Welfare, 245–46.Google Scholar

8. Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923) and Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925).

9. This doctrine was partly a response to growing concerns among lawmakers in the 1920s about the socialization of the law during the Progressive Era. For an analysis of socialized law in theory and practice, see Willrich, Michael, City of Courts: Socializing Justice in Progressive Era Chicago (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2003)Google Scholar.

10. Woodhouse, , “Who Owns the Child?” Also see Annette Ruth Appell, “Virtual Mothers and the Meaning of Parenthood,” University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform 34 (Summer 2001): 683–790.Google Scholar

11. See, for example, the following studies of family law and life in the nineteenth century: Grossberg, Michael, Governing the Hearth: Law and the Family in Nineteenth-Century America (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1995)Google Scholar ; Gordon, Linda, Heroes of Their Own Lives: The Politics and History of Family Violence, Boston, 1880–1960 (New York: Viking, 1988)Google Scholar ; Zelizer, Viviana A., Pricing the Priceless Child: The Changing Social Value of Children (New York: Basic Books, 1985)Google Scholar ; and Mintz, Steven and Kellog, Susan, Domestic Revolutions: A Social History of American Family Life (New York: Free Press, 1988).Google Scholar For a remarkable social and cultural history of a child's troubled life and death in the Gilded Age, see Brumberg, Joan Jacobs, Kansas Charley: The Story of a Nineteenth-Century Boy Murderer (New York: Viking, 2003)Google Scholar.

12. The People v. Turner, 55 Ill. 280 (1870). Scholars have had a difficult time fitting this seemingly anomalous decision into the history of American juvenile justice. See Fox, Sanford J., “Juvenile Justice Reform: An Historical Perspective,” Stanford Law Review 22 (June 1970): 1216–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Platt, Anthony M., The Child Savers: The Invention of Delinquency, 2d ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977)Google Scholar ; Schlossman, Steven L., Love and the American Delinquent: The Theory and Practice of “Progressive” Juvenile Justice, 1825–1920 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977), 11–14Google Scholar ; and Gittens, Joan, Poor Relations: The Children of the State in Illinois, 1818–1990 (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1994), 97–104Google Scholar.

13. Petition of Ferrier, 103 Ill. 367 (1882) and County of McLean v. Laura B. Humphreys, 104 Ill. 379 (1882).

14. Reform School, Section 1, in Laws and Ordinances Governing the City of Chicago, January 1, 1866, With An Appendix, Containing the Former Legislation Relating to the City, And Notes of Decisions of the Supreme Court of Illinois, Relating to Corporations, ed. Gary, Joseph E. (Chicago: E. B. Myers and Chandler, 1866), 130.Google Scholar Also see the brief and argument of the relator, William T. Butler, filed November 23, 1870, n.p. Case file 16742, Supreme Court Archives, Springfield, Illinois [hereafter cited as Butler's brief]. The attorneys in the O'Connell case, Butler and Stiles, both argued that the laws in question were a combination of the reform school section of the city charter and “An Act in Reference to the Reform School of the City of Chicago,” passed by the Illinois General Assembly on March 5, 1867.

15. Brief by I. N. Stiles, the City Attorney and counsel for the Chicago Reform School, filed November 23, 1870, 1. Case file 16742 [hereafter cited as Stiles's brief].

16. Laws and Ordinances Governing the City of Chicago, 135. For a discussion of the school's educational philosophy, see Fox, “Juvenile Justice Reform,”1207–12.

17. In 1827 Illinois had raised the age of criminal responsibility from seven (the age set by English common law) to ten. Platt, , The Child Savers, 101–2.Google Scholar For discussions of how the criminal justice system handled children's cases, see Altgeld, John P., Live Questions Including Our Penal Machinery (Chicago: Humboldt Publishing Co., 1890)Google Scholar and “Report of the Members of the Cook County Grand Jury,” November 16, 1898, Chicago Historical Society, ChicagoGoogle Scholar.

18. Sklar, Kathryn Kish, Florence Kelley and the Nation's Work: The Rise of Women's Political Culture, 1830–1900 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995), chap. 7.Google Scholar On the limited number of compulsory attendance and child labor laws in this period, see Abbott, Grace, The Child and the State (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1938), 1:260Google Scholar.

19. Children also worked on farms in rural American, but early child labor laws generally applied only to mining and industrial workplaces. For a good overview of child labor in the late nineteenth century, see Clement, Priscilla Ferguson, Growing Pains: Children in the Industrial Age, 1850–1890 (New York: Twayne, 1997), chap. 5Google Scholar.

20. Thirteenth Annual Report (1869), 42–43. In 1870 the United States Census recorded the occupations of child laborers for the first time. Clement, Growing Pains, 133.

21. “Petition for Habeas Corpus,” issued November 12, 1870, n.p. Case No. 16472, Supreme Court Archives, Springfield, Illinois.

22. Seventy-eight children were committed to the school in 1870. The children “confessed to” the following offenses: petit larceny (30), vagrancy (12), grand larceny (10), burglary (7), running away from home (7), incorrigibility (6), truancy (4), assault (1), and burning hay (1). Chicago Reform School Annual Reports, 1866–1872 (Chicago, 1872), 14. [Hereafter all cites will be to a specific annual report.]

23. Twelfth Annual Report (1868), 51.

24. According to the school's records, 581 of out the 1,284 children committed to the school between 1856 and 1872 had Irish parents. A separate table listed the “nativity” of the children themselves. It recorded that 161 out of the 1,284 children were Irish, presumably this meant that they had been born in Ireland. Sixteenth Annual Report (1872), 15–16.

25. Gittens, , Poor Relations, 95–97.Google Scholar

26. Article II, Section 7 of the Illinois Constitution of 1870 guaranteed “the privilege or writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.”

27. “Writ of Habeas Corpus,” filed November 18, 1870, n.p. Case File 16742, Supreme Court Archives, Springfield, Illinois.

28. Fourteenth Annual Report (1870), 22–23.

29. “Justice and the Reform School,” The Chicago Times, December 2, 1870, p. 4.Google Scholar

30. Quoted in Foner, , Reconstruction, 448Google Scholar

31. “Elections,” The Chicago Times, November 9, 1870, p. 1.Google Scholar

32. Foner, , Reconstruction, 448.Google Scholar

33. Butler's brief, n.p

34. “Argument for relator,” Novemebr 26, 1870,Google Scholar Case No. 16742, Supreme Court Archives, Springfield, Illinois, n.p. (emphasis in original). After reading his opposing counsel's brief, Butler filed a second brief. He had filed his first brief on November 23.

35. Sixteenth Annual Report (1872), 19.Google Scholar

36. In its first section, the Thirteenth Amendment banned involuntary servitude: “Neither Slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” In its first section, the Fourteenth Amendment declared: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.”

37. Butler's brief, n.p.

38. For a good introduction to the legal privileges of “whiteness,” see Harris, Cheryl I., “Whiteness as Property,” Harvard Law Review 106 (June 1993):1710–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39. Jacobson, Matthew Frye, Whiteness of a Different Color: European Immigration and the Alchemy of Race (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1998).Google Scholar

40. “Elections,” p. 1.

41. “The Bench and Bar,” The Chicago Times, November 10, 1870, p. 3.Google Scholar

42. Butler's brief, n.p.

43. Article II, Section 2.

44. The remainder of the section read: “but the trial of civil cases before justices of the peace by a jury of less than twelve men may be authorized by law” Article II, Section 5.

45. The remainder of the section read: “and no conviction shall work corruption of blood or forfeiture of estate; nor shall any person be transported out of the state for any offense committed within the same.” Article II, Section 11.

46. The remainder of the section read: “he ought to obtain, by law, right and justice freely, and without being obliged to purchase it, completely and without denial, promptly, and without delay.” Article II, Section 19.

47. Butler's brief, n.p.

48. On the significance of juries for American governance in the nineteenth century, see Amar, The Bill of Rights, esp. chap 5.

49. Butler's brief (emphasis in original).

50. Ex Parte Crouse, 4 Wharton 9 (Pa., 1838). For an excellent discussion of the case see Grossberg, Michael, A Judgment for Solomon: The D'Hauteville Case and Legal Experience in Antebellum America (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 74–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

51. Novak, The People's Welfare.

52. Crouse, 11.

53. Stiles's brief, 2.

54. Ibid., 1.

55. Stanley, , From Bondage to Contract, x.Google Scholar

56. Quoted in Stanley, , From Bondage to Contract, 62.Google Scholar

57. Stiles's brief, 2.

58. Ibid., 1.

59. For analysis of the creation of the liberal order, see Novak, , The People's Welfare, 235–48Google Scholar.

60. Butler's brief, n.p.

61. “Thornton, Anthony,” in Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, ed. Bateman, Newton et al. (Chicago: Munsell Publishing, 1906), 1:522.Google Scholar Thornton only served on the Illinois Supreme Court for three years and resigned in 1873.

62. “The Supreme Court,” The Chicago Times, November 28, 1870, p. 3.Google Scholar

63. Turner, 284.

64. Ibid., 283–84.

65. Stanley, , From Bondage to Contract, 138.Google Scholar

66. “Petition for Habeas Corpus,” n.p. According to his petition, Michael O'Connell was “a poor man, of the age of 50 years; [and] that the said Daniel O'Connell, his said son, for the eighteen month previous to his commitment to said Reform School had been engaged and employed in a Tobacco factory in said City of Chicago; and was receiving as wages for his labor in said Tobacco factory, the sum of Four Dollars per week at the time of his commitment to said Reform School.”

67. Turner, 285.

68. Ibid. Thornton quoted this passage, but did not name its author.

69. Turner, 286.

70. About forty percent of the soldiers who served in the Civil War were minors. Clement, Growing Pains, 12.

71. Tyler, Ransom H., Commentaries on the Law of Infancy, including Guardianship and Custody of Infants, and the Law of Coverture, embracing Dower Marriages and Divorce, and the Statutory Policy of the Several States in Respect to Husband and Wife (Albany: W. Gould and Son, 1868), 112–13.Google Scholar

72. Schouler, James, A Treatise on the Law of Domestic Relations Embracing Husband and Wife, Parent and Child, Guardian and Ward, Infancy, and Master and Servant (Boston: Little, Brown, 1870), 76–100.Google Scholar

73. Tyler, , Commentaries on the Law of Infancy, 99.Google Scholar

74. Turner, 287.

75. Ibid.

76. Ibid.

77. Ibid.

78. Ibid., 286.

79. Gittens, , Poor Relations, 99.Google Scholar

80. Wines, E. C., The State of Prisons and of Child-Saving Institutions in the Civilized World (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1880), 173.Google Scholar

81. Ninth Biennial Report of the Superintendent of Public Instruction of the State of Illinois, 1871–1872 (Springfield, 1872), 202Google Scholar [hereafter cited as Bateman, Report].

82. Bateman, , Report, 224Google Scholar (emphasis in original).

83. Redfield, Isaac, “Comment,” American Law Register 19 (1871): 372–74.Google Scholar

84. Ibid., 375.

85. Turner-like decisions that led to the release of children from houses of refuge and reform schools included Commonwealth v. Horregan, 127 Mass. 450 (1879)Google Scholar ; State (ex rel. Cunningham) v. Ray, 63 N.H. 406 (1885); and Ex Parte Jonie Becknell, 119 Cal. 496 (1897)Google Scholar.

86. Grossberg, , “Changing Conceptions of Child Welfare,” 24.Google Scholar

87. Katz, Michael B., In the Shadow of the Poorhouse: A Social History of Welfare in America (New York: Basic Books, 1986), 113–45.Google Scholar

88. Hacsi, Timothy A., Second Home: Orphan Asylums and Poor Families in America (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

89. Katz, , In the Shadow of the Poorhouse, 104.Google Scholar

90. Tifflin, Susan, In Whose Best Interest? Child Welfare Reform in the Progressive Era (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1982), 190–91.Google Scholar

91. Folks, Homer, The Care of Destitute, Neglected, and Delinquent Children (New York: Macmillan, 1902Google Scholar ; reprint Washington D.C.: NAWS Classic Series); Abbott, , The Child and the State, 2:8–21Google Scholar.

92. “An Act to Establish a State Public School for Dependent and Neglected Children,” reprinted in Abbott, , The Child and the State, 2:54–57Google Scholar ; Merrill, G. A., “State Public Schools for Dependent and Neglected Children,” History of Child Saving in the United States (1893; reprint Montclair, N.J.: Patterson Smith, 1971), 204–46Google Scholar.

93. By the turn of the twentieth century, Colorado, Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, Wisconsin, and Texas had all adopted the Michigan plan. Folks, , The Care of Destitute, Neglected, and Delinquent Children, 82Google Scholar.

94. Ibid., 97–98. Although Folks listed concerns about partisan politics as a leading objection to the state system, he argued that these charges were generally exaggerated.

95. By the end of the nineteenth century, California, Delaware, the District of Columbia, New York, Maryland, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee all made appropriations to some child welfare institutions within their borders. Folks, , Care of Destitute, Neglected, and Delinquent Children, 116Google Scholar.

96. “An Act for Industrial Schools for Girls,” Laws of Illinois (Springfield: Weber and Co., 1879), 309–13.Google Scholar

97. Milwaukee Industrial School v. Supervisor of Milwaukee County, 40 Wis. 328 (1876).

98. “An Act for Industrial Schools for Girls,” 309.

99. Ibid., 313.

100. Ibid., 309.

101. Ibid.

102. This notice requirement only applied if the parents or guardians were in the county at the time.

103. As Martha Minow has noted, “The problem of insuring that advocates work towards the best interests of the client is inherent in any system which uses counsel to represent clients. Where one party is given the authority to put forward another's interests, there is always the danger that the agent will not be faithful to the interests of his client. The agent may have misperceived what the client wanted. The agent may believe something to be in the client's interests when it actually is not. Finally, wherever power is delegated, there is always the potential and incentive for the agent to put his own interests ahead of those of his client. These problems infect almost every human relationship.” Minow, Interpreting Rights, 1889–90.

104. “An Act for Industrial Schools for Girls,” 310

105. Ibid., 312.

106. Ibid.

107. Ibid.

108. Ibid., 310.

109. Ibid., 313.

110. On health concerns in children's institutions in the 1870s and 1880s, see Cmiel, Kenneth, A Home of Another Kind: One Chicago Orphanage and the Tangle of Child Welfare (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), 25–26Google Scholar.

111. Illinois' age of consent (i.e., the age at which girls could legally consent to sex) was set as ten years of age, which was the norm in the 1880s. For an analysis of the campaign to raise the age of consent law in the late nineteenth century, see Odem, Mary E., Delinquent Daughters: Protecting and Policing Adolescent Female Sexuality in the United States, 1885–1920 (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1995), chap. 1Google Scholar.

112. “Petition of Alexander M. Ferrier,” November 10, 1881, Case No. 20610, Supreme Court Archives, Springfield, Illinois, n.p. The information about Ferrier's family comes from the 1880 Census track for Illinois, Cook County, Registration District, 123, p. 22.

113. “Petition of Alexander M. Ferrier,” n.p.

114. “Abstract, In the Matter of the Petition of Alexander M. Ferrier To Have Winifred Breem [sic] Declared A Dependent Girl,” Case No. 20610, Supreme Court Archives, Spring-field, Illinois, p. 3.

115. Ibid.

116. According to the 1880 census track, Ferrier and his wife had four daughters (Agnes, age 11; Anna, age 9; Helen, age 8; and Gracie, age 6). Dr. Hanson testified that he had several children.

117. “Abstract,” p. 3.

118. On the competency of children and adolescents to understand the legal process, see Youth on Trial: A Developmental Perspective on Juvenile Justice, ed. Grisso, Thomas and Schwartz, Robert G. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000)Google Scholar.

119. “Abstract,” p. 4.

120. This paragraph is drawn from Beveridge's testimony, which is printed on an insert, located between pages three and four of the “Abstract.”

121. Ibid. (emphasis in original).

122. An attorney for the Industrial School charged that Willett was only “acting in the name of the respondent [Winifred], but in reality” represented Cook County. “Brief for Appellees,” Case No. 20610, Supreme Court Archives, Springfield, Illinois. Determining how attorneys should represent children raises a host of ethical questions. For more discussion of these issues as well as a proposed model, see Guggenheim, Martin, “A Paradigm for Determining the Role of Counsel for Children,” Fordham Law Review 64 (March 1996): 1399–1433.Google Scholar For an excellent discussion of these fears about creating dependency in this age of ascendant liberalism, see Sawislak, Karen, Smoldering City: Chicagoans and the Great Fire, 1871–1874 (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1995)Google Scholar.

123. “Appellant's Brief,” Case No. 20610, Supreme Court Archives, Springfield, Illinois, p. 7 (emphasis in original) [hereafter Willett's Brief].

124. “Willett's Brief,” p. 4. The opposing counsel, N. M. Jones, mocked Willett for this argument: “He is afraid lest Cook county shall be a refuge for dependent girls from all parts of the world! He seems as greatly agitated in regard to their irruption as the Californians are in regard to the Chinese. This school, however, has, been established four years, and yet Cook county, with its 600,000 inhabitants, has now committed to said school less than forty girls, although thousands of boys and girls are annually arrested in said county and punished for crime.” “Appellee's Brief,” Case No. 20610, Supreme Court Archives, Springfield, Illinois p. 8 [hereafter Jones's Brief].

125. “Willett's Brief,” p. 5

126. Ibid.

127. According to section 8 of the Industrial School Act, “The fees for conveying a dependent girl to an Industrial School for Girls, shall be the same as conveying a juvenile offender to the Reform School for Juvenile Offenders, at Pontiac, in this State, and they shall be paid by the counties from which such dependent girls are sent, unless they are paid by the parent or guardian.” “An Act for Industrial Schools for Girls,” 311.

128. Ibid., 313.

129. Article 8, Section 3 of the Illinois Constitution of 1870 declared: “Neither the General Assembly, nor any city, town, township, school district or other public corporation shall ever make any appropriation, or pay from any public fund whatever, anything in aid of any church or sectarian purpose, or to help support or sustain any school, academy, seminary, college, university, or other literary or scientific institution, controlled by any church or sectarian denomination whatever; nor shall any grant or donation of land, money or other personal property ever be made by the State, or any such public corporation, to any church, or for any sectarian purpose.”

130. “Appellant's Brief,” Case No. 6293, Supreme Court Archives, Springfield, Illinois, p. 6.

131. Ibid., 9.

132. Ibid., 12.

133. “Appellee's Brief,” Case No. 6293, Supreme Court Archives, Springfield, Illinois, p. 6.

134. “Jones' Brief,” 15.

135. Ibid., 18.

136. Petition of Ferrier, 103 Ill. 367 (1882).

137. Ibid., 371.

138. Ibid., 372.

139. Ibid., 374.

140. Ibid., 373.

141. Justice Sheldon was relying upon William Blackstone, Commentaries of the Laws of England, vol. 1, 125. It is not clear which edition he used.

142. For an overview of Sheldon's life and career, see Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois, 477.

143. Ferrier, 373.

144. Ibid., 374.

145. Humphreys, 383.

146. Six years later, for example, the court did declare that the Chicago Industrial School for Girls, a Catholic school, was a sectarian institution. County of Cook v. The Chicago Industrial School for Girls, 125 Ill. 540 (1888).

147. Humphreys, 383–84.

148. “An Act to Provide For and Aid Training Schools for Boys,” Laws of Illinois (Springfield: H. W. Broker's Printing House, 1883).Google Scholar Due to the different ages of majority for boys and girls in Illinois, the length of commitments differed. Training schools retained custody over boys until they turned twenty-one, whereas industrial schools had custody over girls only until they turned eighteen. Training schools received smaller subsidies than industrial schools. They were paid from between $7 to $9 per boy, considerably less than the $10 per-child subsidy paid to industrial schools.

149. See, for example, Tanenhaus, David S., Juvenile Justice in the Making (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004).Google Scholar For analysis of African Americans keeping the spirit of the Civil War and Reconstruction alive, see Blight, David W., Race and Reunion: The Civil War in American Memory (Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2001).Google Scholar For the status of civil rights law in Illinois in the 1880s, see Dale, Elizabeth, “Social Equality Does Not Exist among Them or Us: Baylies vs. Curry and Civil Rights in Chicago, 1888,” American Historical Review 102 (April 1997): 311–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar In his influential brief for Pierce v. Oregon (1925), the Columbia Law professor William D. Guthrie, for example, cited Turner as a precedent that supported the liberty of parents. Mr. William D. Guthrie, with whom Mr. Bernard Hershhoff was on the brief, for appellee in No. 583, Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, 519 (1925). For discussion of Guthrie's role in the parental rights cases of the 1920s, see Woodhouse, , “Who Owns the Child?” 1070–80Google Scholar.

150. Commonwealth v. Fisher, 213 Pa. 48, 53 (1905).

151. Tanenhaus, David S., “Growing Up Dependent: Family Preservation in Early Twentieth-Century Chicago,” Law and History Review 19 (Fall 2001): 547–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

152. For characterizations of 1960s child savers attacking the accomplishments of the Progressive Era child savers, see Rothman, David J., “The State as a Parent: Social Policy in the Progressive Era,” in Doing Good: The Limits of Benevolence, ed. Gaylin, Willard et al. (New York: Pantheon Books, 1978), 67–96Google Scholar, and Minow, , “Children's Rights, 1575–76.Google Scholar