Testimony of Dr. J.S. DeJarnette from Hearing on Appeal of Order to sterilize Carrie Buck
11/18/1924
Add to Favorites:
Add all page(s) of this document to activity:
Add only page 1 to activity:
Add only page 2 to activity:
Add only page 3 to activity:
Add only page 4 to activity:
Add only page 5 to activity:
Add only page 6 to activity:
Add only page 7 to activity:
Add only page 8 to activity:
Add only page 9 to activity:
Add only page 10 to activity:
Add only page 11 to activity:
Add only page 12 to activity:
This document comes from the case file for Buck v. Bell, concerning the issue of involuntary sterilization. This statement of Evidence from Hearing on Appeal of Order to sterilize Carrie Buck includes testimony from Dr. J.S. DeJarnette, a Superintendent of the Western State Hospital at Staunton, Virginia. His testimony begins near the middle of page 71 of this filing.
In his testimony, Dr. DeJarnette explain his experiences treating over eleven thousand "mental defectives" and his opinion on the Virginia Sterilization Law. He describes the sterilization of the "insane, idiotic, feeblemind, or epileptic...as the best thing than can be done...for the patient and for society." He also testifies to his opinion about the inheritability of feeblemindedness and the sterilization process.
At 17 years old, Carrie Buck became pregnant (later reported to have been the result of rape, allegedly by a relative of her foster parents). Shortly after the birth of her child, her foster parents had her committed to the “Virginia Colony for Epileptics and Feeble-Minded” on the grounds of feeble-mindedness, incorrigible behavior and promiscuity. Buck was declared mentally incompetent and her daughter was taken away from her.
Albert S. Priddy, the superintendent of the “Colony for Epileptics and Feeble-Minded,” used Carrie to test the legality of Virginia’s involuntary sterilization law. John H. Bell replaced Priddy after his death in 1925.
On May 2, 1927, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the state’s statute allowing for the sterilization of people who were thought of as “unfit,” including the intellectually disabled. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. delivered the majority opinion of the Court, including: “It is better for all the world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind….Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” (This referenced the fact that Buck’s mother had been committed to a state institution, Buck’s diagnosis, and the assumption in the Court’s opinion that Buck’s children would be “socially inadequate.”)
Bell performed Buck’s sterilization on October 19, 1927. She was the first person involuntarily sterilized under Virginia’s Laws for the sterilization of persons considered “unfit” — an estimated 8,300 Virginians were sterilized under the state law from 1927 to 1972.
In his testimony, Dr. DeJarnette explain his experiences treating over eleven thousand "mental defectives" and his opinion on the Virginia Sterilization Law. He describes the sterilization of the "insane, idiotic, feeblemind, or epileptic...as the best thing than can be done...for the patient and for society." He also testifies to his opinion about the inheritability of feeblemindedness and the sterilization process.
At 17 years old, Carrie Buck became pregnant (later reported to have been the result of rape, allegedly by a relative of her foster parents). Shortly after the birth of her child, her foster parents had her committed to the “Virginia Colony for Epileptics and Feeble-Minded” on the grounds of feeble-mindedness, incorrigible behavior and promiscuity. Buck was declared mentally incompetent and her daughter was taken away from her.
Albert S. Priddy, the superintendent of the “Colony for Epileptics and Feeble-Minded,” used Carrie to test the legality of Virginia’s involuntary sterilization law. John H. Bell replaced Priddy after his death in 1925.
On May 2, 1927, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the state’s statute allowing for the sterilization of people who were thought of as “unfit,” including the intellectually disabled. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. delivered the majority opinion of the Court, including: “It is better for all the world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind….Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” (This referenced the fact that Buck’s mother had been committed to a state institution, Buck’s diagnosis, and the assumption in the Court’s opinion that Buck’s children would be “socially inadequate.”)
Bell performed Buck’s sterilization on October 19, 1927. She was the first person involuntarily sterilized under Virginia’s Laws for the sterilization of persons considered “unfit” — an estimated 8,300 Virginians were sterilized under the state law from 1927 to 1972.
Transcript
115**DOCTOR J.S. DE JARNETTE,
a witness of lawful age, having been first duly sworn, testified as
follows:
Direct Examination
BY COL. STRODE:
Q Doctor, where do you live, and what is your occupation?
A Staunton, and my occupation is Superintendent of the Western State Hospital at Staunton.
Q What class of patients?
A Chiefly the insane. We take also the habitual drunkards and dopers-drug addicts.
Q How long have you been officially connected with the hospitalat Staunton?
A Thirty-six years.
Q How long have you been Superintendent?
A Since 1906
Q How does that hospital compare in size with four state hospitals for white patients, similar?
A It is the largest.
Q How many patients do you have there, on an average?
A Twenty-one hundred actually in the hospitaland the balance on parole.
72 Carrie Buck vs. Dr. J.H. Bell
Q You are a physician?
A Yes, sir.
116*
*Q Specializing in insanity?
A For thirty-six years.
Q Could you approximate the number of mental defectives that you have been called upon, either directly or in consultation, to treat during your thirty-six years' experience?
A I have been-you mean including the insane?
Q That is what I had special reference to.
A I have treated a little over eleven thousand patients since I have been connected with the hospital.
Q Doctor, there is involved in this case an application of what we may term the Virginia Sterilization Statute, passed at the last meeting of the General Assembly.
A I am familiar with that statute.
Q You are familiar with that statute?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, not viewing the matter from a legal standpoint, but from the standpoint of your experience in dealing with patients such as are committed to your hospital, and also from the standpoint of the welfare of society, what have you to say about the operation of this act?
A The operation of sterilization of insane people?
Q No. I called your particular attention to the provisions of this act, which, of course, covers that, but the act provides that
*117
this operation for sterilization shall not be performed on any patient unless in the first place the superintendent of the hospital thinks it is a proper case and petitions his board of the hospital for authority. It then provides that at a hearing, which must be after notice, that it shall not authorize you to perform this operation unless the inmate is either insane, idiotic, feebleminded, or epileptic or is the probable, potential parent of feebleminded offspring. It provides also that the said inmate may be sterilized without detriment to his general health; also that the welfare of the inmate and of society will be promoted by such sterilization. Now, I ask you the first general question: what, in our opinion, would be the effect of the welfare of
the individual who might be operated upon, and upon society in general?
A It is the best thing that can be done for them?
Q For who?
A for the patient and for society.
Q The first finding that the Board must find, and of course, that the Court must find would be that the inmate is either insane, idiotic
Carrie Buck vs. Dr. J.H. Bell 73
imbecile, or epileptic. The would first have to find that Carrie Buck is feebleminded?
A Yes, sir.
Q Is the condition of feeblemindedness one that is judicially ascertainable?
A Yes, sir
*118
Q Are there well recognized tests that may be applied that would safely classify those that are feebleminded?
A There are.
Q What would you say was a feebleminded person?
A I would say a feebleminded person was one who, on account of his mental condition, was unable to take care of himself properly.
Q Mental condition in what way?
A Any way that occurs from his birth or the failure to develop of his mind, would strictly come within the definition. Of course, insanity would cover the whole thing.
Q I understand that insanity may supervene upon a mind of normal development, but mental defectives----
A That is feeble from birth.
Q Now, feeblemindedness is---
A Is inherited and acquired.
Q Is it curable?
A No, sir,
Q It is an incurable mental defect?
A Yes, sir.
Q Therefore it is judicially ascertainable, whether or not any particular individual is feebleminded, is it?
A It is.
Q In your experience, and in your studies, have you reached any conclusion as to whether or not there are certain laws of heredity which are ascertainable and which may be relied on in determining whether or not a feebleminded patient is likely to be a potential parent of socially inadequate offspring?
A Yes, sir.
Q I will ask you to enlarge on that. I wish you would give the Court the benefit of some of your observations. Give them the family history, to a degree, of one of these feebleminded patients--how far you can foresee of they will probably propogate?
A Well, you find feeblemindedness runs in families. That is, if the parents are feebleminded and the children are feebleminded, you have every right to believe it is from inheritance. Occasionally a feebleminded child may be from an injury, which will not affect its offspring--that if, if it is accidental.
74 Carrie Buck vs. Dr. J.H. Bell
Q Yes, sir, but if it is inherited?
A If it is inherited; he is liable to transmit it, and I think Mendel's law covers it as well. Of course you are familiar with that.
Q No, I am not. What is Mendel's law?
A Well, Mendel's law is a law in which the offspring--Mendel was a Catholic priest, and he worked out the law of inheritance of sweet peas. He took the vegetable world and took those red and white peas and crossed them, and he found that by crossing the red and white peas he got certain results: one-fourth of them would have what we call the dominant quality of one of the peas, and one would be recessive. The dominant is, for instance, suppose the red is dominating; one-fourth of the peas will come red, and that red pea will continue to breed red. Another fourth may breed--may be red, but it will have a remnant of the white stock in it, and if you breed it with another red pea it will bring out occasionally some with Others of the peas will be mixed one-fourth, and you will have a mixed breed, and if you breed these mixed ones together for awhile you will get a red pea occasionally, and occasionally a white pea, but if you keep on breeding, you will get a mixed pea. One-fourth of them will be dominant; half will be mixed, and one-fourth then will be a white pea will breed a red one. It took him years and years to work it out, and he found out that in breeding people, a man that has a certain quality of mind will breed one-fourth a certain way. Now, we know in breeding animals, take a thoroughbred bull and breed him on mixed stock and you will get the color of the thoroughbred--it is dominant, but the mixed breed has no tendency to go in any particular direction and the thoroughbred dominates. That is Mendel's law.
Q Now, what is your observation as too its application to human beings?
A I have never worked the law out, but it seems to me from the history of the cases I have had that they work out pretty much that way, but I have no accurate knowledge of it, because inheritance is such a complicated thing that unless a man devotes himself particularly to it--now, you take a feebleminded woman, if she has a child it is very apt to be--that one-fourth of them will be feebleminded. If both parents are feebleminded, it is practically certain that the children will all be feebleminded.
Q But if the feebleminded woman is mated with a normal man?
A Then about one-fourth of them would probably be feebleminded.
Q Suppose that a normal man has a recessive trait of the feeble-
75 Carrie Buck vs. Dr. J.H. Bell
minded in him; what effect would that have on the offspring of the mother?
A About one-half. It depends on the mother.
Q Have you had opportunities to observe as to what is the likelihood of a feebleminded woman who is loose in society--is she more likely to mate with people of her own type, or normal men?
A The feebleminded woman will have three children to every one child a college graduate will have. They are easily over-sexed, and depends on their look as to how the boys or men will take advantage of them, and it depends on her opportunities. An illustration was had in New Jersey, called the Callicac case. Old man
122*
John Callicac in 1755 had an illegitimate child by a feebleminded woman. He also had no offspring from his wife, and none of them were feebleminded. There were 480 offspring as a result of the child he had by this feebleminded woman--(Dr. DeJarnette at this points consults his notes)--there were 143 feebleminded; 44 normal and 293 undetermined; probably couldn't get the history of them--this occurred in 1755. That is a report that was generally published throughout most of the books on heredity.
Q In other words, the ancestor Callicac was normal?
A Supposed to be.
Q Mated with a wife that was normal?
A Yes, sir, and had 496 descents.
Q None of them feebleminded?
A No
Q None criminal?
A None so far as we know.
Q And then he mated with a feebleminded girl?
A And their descendants were480--143 of them were dependents on the State of New Jersey--that is about one-fourth--that is a little over one-fourth.
Q Now, on the side of the mating with the normal woman, what was the type of the offspring as illustrated in the examples?
A Normal all the way through.
123*
*Q Did any of them reach eminence, do you know?
A I don't remember.
Q You don't know about that, Doctor DeJarnette? Now, the next requirement here is that the patient may be sexually sterilized without detriment to his physical welfare?
A The operation must be by sectomy--sylgectomy. Now, sylgectomy is the operation that the hospital ordered should be made on this patient.
76 Carrie Buck vs. Dr. J.H. Bell
Q I wish you would tell his Honor whether or not that operation may be performed without detriment, as the statute puts it, to the general health of the patient?
A It can be. Would you want me to give a reason for it?
Q Yes, just explain to the Court what the operation is?
A Every woman has two ovaries. Monthly a little egg comes out of this ovary - practically every month - and is passed down into the womb. There is a small tube, about the size of a broom straw which connects the ovary with the womb. Sylgectomy is cutting off this little tube and tying off the ends. Of course, you have to cut into the abdominal cavity, cut off those tubes, and tie the ends. It is a very safe operation in the hands of a skilled surgeon. It gives 100 per cent successful results. Now, the operation leaves the ovaries. The ovaries are
124*
*important to a woman. They keep her normal health. It does not interfere with her sexual desire; it does not interfere with her sexual enjoyment; but it does stop reproduction. Now, in the male, there is a little tube running from the testicle. That tube is cut down entirely, but I don't think that operation ought to be done on a very young person, because - I mean it should be done on a very young person, because you leave the testicle in place. Now, if you were to take the testicle out, it ought not to be done on a very young person, because you notice the bull - the bull-neck is a result of that. If you do leave this tube, the secretion continues in his body, and he is left as a normal man. This operation on a male does not interfere with his sexual desire or enjoyment, but does stop reproduction. Now, if we remember that the insane and the unfit and unsafe of our state cost us approximately one-seventh of our income under the present conditions - and among the feeble-minded, I don't suppose we have more than one-fiftieth of them segregated, and they are out in the world reproducing, and the reproduction of the unfit is just as much a manufactured article as plows and threshing machines, because the feeble-minded produce their kind.
Q Now, doctor, I want to ask you about the operation of ......; whether or not it is an operation that in a proper
125*
case may be performed upon a woman of child-bearing age without detriment to his or her general health?
A I have just said so. I say it again.
Q The next requirement is that the welfare of the inmate shall be promotted by such sterilization. In what way would you say it would promote her welfare?
A In the first place, the inmate's situation is that he is locked up. He has no opportunity to gratify his sexual desire which God has given
Carrie Buck vs. Dr. J.H. Bell 77
him--no opportunity to do that. He is a burden to the State. Now, if he is sterilized, he can be liberated, and under direction can probably make his living. He can marry and have the sexual gratification which he could otherwise have if he was out in the world, without bringing
children into the world. A woman, otherwise, would be having them anyway, and she cannot take care of the children which she is liable, and almost certain to bring into the world.
Q Naturally, it is provided that this operation should not be performed only for the welfare of society. In what way would you say the welfare of society would be promoted by it?
A The standard of general intelligence would be lifted; the crimes that they are liable to produce, as there are a larger and larger percentage of feeble-minded in prison, and as it affects that, it would lower the number of our criminals.
*Q Could you state approximately, or make any conjecture of how many patients there are in our hospital that might, with benefit to themselves and to society, be brought under the operation of this statute?
A I would say at present we have about twenty, and we will run from ten to fifteen a year. Now, that is including the insane. Some forms of insanity appear to be brought about by reproduction. That is an old puerperal mania. We have had women come back to five or six times after reproducing, with the most terrible form of insanity which we have to deal with.
Q Have you found, in your thirty-six years of experience, marked examples of the working out of the laws of heredity in the families which have come to you from time to time?
A I have. I can cite you some instances if you think it necessary to go into that.
Q No, I do not think it is necessary. Now, one other question: the bulk of your patients are insane?
A Yes, sir.
Q They are not, themselves, certainly, a great many of them capable of forming an intelligent judgment as to what is best for their own welfare, are they, in respect to the effects of such an operation as this?
A No, sir, I believe it is a question of education, Mr. Strode.
127*
*Q Now, taking the patient who, through insanity or feeble-mindedness, is not capable of forming an intelligent judgment as to whether or not this operation would be for their own
welfare, do you know of any better way of having a judicial ascertain-
78 Carrie Buck vs. Dr. J.H. Bell
-ment by the State as to whether or not it would be better to have this operation performed, than as set out in this act?
A I do not, and I would like to modify my statement as to patients being able to say what is good for themselves, because a good many are very, very anxious that this operation be done, to free them from the curse of reproduction.
Q I was asking you this question; if the patient has not the intelligence of mind to decide whether this operation should be performed should not there by some tribunal somewhere to decide whether that operation should be performed?
A It should , and this is the best I have ever seen.
Q You have heard the evidence tending to show that this girl, Carrie Buck, is herself feeble-minded; that her mother is also an inmate of the same institution and is feeble-minded; and that Carrie has an illegitimate child, who, though only eight months old, does not appear to be normal. Taking those facts into consideration with the other evidence you have heard here in regard to her, what would you say as to whether or not she is the probable parent
of socially inadequate offspring, by the laws of heredity?
A I think so.
Q You think her offspring would be probably affected?
A I think so.
Q You think her offspring would be probably affected?
A I think so.
Q You think she might be sterilized without detriment to her general health?
A I do.
Q Do you think her welfare and the welfare of society would be prompted by her sterilization?
A I do.
Cross Examination
BY MR. WHITEHEAD:
Q The same objection to all that is applicable to the point that I am going to make, because a good deal that the doctor has said, I can see, is absolutely legal testimony.
Now, Doctor, this act of the legislature applies not only to the feeble-minded, but to the insane, idiots, and epileptics. Your experience for thirty years has been more largely with the insane?
A Yes, sir.
Q Your institution for the white insane in the state?
Carrie Buck vs. Dr. J.H. Bell 79
129*
*A Yes, sir.
Q Doctor, what is, in your opinion as a physician and from your experience as superintendent of that hospital, what in your opinion is the greatest cause of insanity?
A Inheritance.
Q Have you ever had occasion to trace back along the lines of heredity to find out what was the beginning of the thing?
A No, sir. Adam, I think, was a little off himself on some things. The only history we have is given in the regular commitments papers, and that frequently states that the patients parents had been affected.
Q What proportion of insanity is directly, in your opinion, attributable to syphilis?
A That varies. In our hospital we took 2,400 Wasserman's and only two per cent. were syphilitic--24 percent in the negro. In New York State they ran 18 percent.
Q If a Wasserman test shows negative, they have no syphilitic taint?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, you say in the hospital --
A Two percent showed positive.
Q And in the negro hospital at Petersburg---
A This is from memory--I think it was 24 percent.
*130
Q You don't know what it is in the Southwestern and the Eastern and the Epileptic Colony?
A I do not.
Q Doctor, you stated awhile ago that the welfare of the patient would be promoted by performing this operation of sterilization--salpingectomy; you stated that the welfare of the patient would be promoted by this?
A Yes.
Q And one of the reasons why you thought that the welfare of the patient would be promoted was that unless they were sterilized and turned loose, they were deprived of the right to sexually gratify themselves?
A Yes.
Q Now, you think that is one of the things where the welfare of the patient would be----
A I think that is looked upon by the average man as one of the most important functions of his life, if everybody would tell the truth about it. It is one of the prime functions, and if you deprive him of that you have deprived him of a tremendous asset.
80 Carrie Buck vs. Dr. J.H. Bell
Q And the same thing is true of a woman?
A Yes.
Q So if a patient is turned out of the hospital after having been sterilized, they would have the right, or opportunity, to gratify themselves sexually? Now, as to society, how would society be benefited?
A By not producing any more of that kind.
131*
*Q It is a question of selective breeding, in other words. You are cutting out the unfit by breaking up the source?
A Yes, sir, and you are raising the standard of intelligence in the state.
Q What are you going to do with these people when you turn them out? You say you turn them out, and say they become self-sustaining: is it your idea that they are to be discharged?
A That is my idea. See that girl: she was a good worker and never brought into conflict with the law until she was pregnant. If she had remained sterile, in all probability she would have been there at home working with Mrs. Dobbs who seems to be very fond of her.
Q Doctor, isn't it a fact that prostitution--that the bulk of the prostitutes, that the surveys show they are more or less feeble-minded?
A I would say that the bulk of them are feeble-minded. I am no expert on prostitutes; I am just giving you my general idea.
Q I imagine you have a good many opportunities--
A Oh, yes, a good many come there.
Q Now, those prostitutes that come to your asylum, isn't it a fact that the majority of those are diseased women?
132*
*A What do you mean by that?
A I mean women with venereal diseases
A Yes, and on point I am glad you mentioned -- they come there, having had venereal diseases and having had children, and, brother, worse that all, white women come there having negro children.
Q Now, the point I am getting to is this: take this girl here--let me state a hypothetical question--this girl is feeble--minded: this girl has an immoral tendency, as demonstrated by the fact that she has already had one illegitimate child. Now, if you sterilized her and turned
her out on society isn't it more than probable that with her having that immoral tendency and her sexual desires not being abated at all by this operation, isn't it more than likely that she will contract venereal disease?
A Is it your idea that feeling safe in sterilization, she will cohabit more promiscuously? Very likely.
Q Don't most of this type come under Dr. Drury's definition? They are fire-ships. They don't understand the use of preventatives,
Carrie Buck vs. Dr. J.H. Bell 81
and therefore are more likely to contract disease. They are thrown into contact and have sexual intercourse with men who are normal men, and give them these diseases; say, syphilis? That man contracting syphilis ultimately gets married to a normal, sound woman. He passes on down to his descendants the syphilitic taint. How is society benefited by letting that girl out?
133*
*A The man who will cohabit with a feeble-minded person would very likely cohabit anyhow and catch the syphilis, but the feeble-minded person is very easily over-sexed, and it makes but very little difference in my opinion; she would be over-sexed anyhow, and that would be for only one generation.
Q But say this girl was sterilized and turned out and in six months she had contracted syphilis, because, as you say, this sterilization has not abated her sexual desires at all. She does know she will not have any more babies, and she goes out and goes on a rampage--
A She has already been one.
Q Well, say she goes on another.
A Very likely
Q So she is a potential distributor to otherwise sound men, and they get married. Now, when the off-spring of those syphilitic men come into the world with a syphilitic taint, how can you say that society would be benefited by turning this girl out?
A Because, I believe it would be just as bad one way as another.
Q Suppose you kept her in that hospital all the time?
A Well, you would not need to sterilize her then.
Q Do you weigh her sexual gratification and liberty as against her becoming, as Dr. Drury call them, a gire-ship?
134*
*A I do.
Q And you you say society would be benefitted by turning her out?
A D you mean to segregate all of them?
Q I mean all those that are in the institution. Those women without the mentality of babies, and who, as you say, are over-sexed; who are likely to drift into the prostitute class.
A And they would drift into it anyway.
Q Not if you kept them in there. How does it benefit society to turn them out?
A It benefits society by not taking care of them, and by the work they do. They are hewers of wood and drawers of water, and there is not very much more likelihood that they would spread venereal disease if sterilized than if they were not. And then it is only for one generation, and the state is not able to pay for segregating them, and by hav-
82 Carrie Buck vs. Dr. J.H. Bell
-ing an in and out method, that is to take these feeble-minded; put them in for a month or two; sterilize them and turn them out; you can get most of them sterilized, whereas the state would keep all of them in care for a hundred--it takes one hundred and sterilizes them, and turns them out and takes another hundred, and so forth?
A Yes.
135*
*Q I agree with you that society would be benefitted to that extent, but what I want to know is whether it would be well to take a chance on turning these girls out that they may drift into prostitution and street-walking and spreading diseases. Now, as I understand, in your institution two percent of the insanity is attributable to syphilis?
A Yes, but what I am trying to say is, say you have one hundred in there now who are not distributing disease, and you have nineteen
hundred out distributing it and reproducing whereas is these people
were operated on and have a clearing house taking the others in and
sterilizing them, you would have that many less reproducing.
Q Now, Doctor, one more question I want to ask you: this law here says that you shall not take sound organs out of the body. Do you consider the cutting of that fallopian tube---
A You don't take out a thing.
Q You just cut it?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, that destroys it?
A No, sir, it shunts the egg off from its destination where it
would develop.
Q It merely prevents reproduction?
A Yes.
(Witness stands aside.)
This primary source comes from the Records of the Supreme Court of the United States.
National Archives Identifier: 45637229
Full Citation: Statement of Evidence from Hearing on Appeal of Order to sterilize Carrie Buck: Testimony of Dr. J.S. DeJarnette; 11/18/1924; Buck v. Bell (Case File #31681); Appellate Jurisdiction Case Files, 1792 - 2010; Records of the Supreme Court of the United States, Record Group 267; National Archives Building, Washington, DC. [Online Version, https://docsteach.org/documents/document/testimony-dr-js-dejarnette-buck-v-bell, April 29, 2024]Rights: Public Domain, Free of Known Copyright Restrictions. Learn more on our privacy and legal page.