This study situates organized concern for animals in relation to other postCivil War reforms--including temperance and child protection. It explains the rise of humane work in light of antebellum trends in law, education, philosophy, and religion, and the perception that animals were at the heart of many sanitary and public health concerns. It qualifies interpretations that reduce animal protection to an exercise in social control. It denies the importance of the Darwinian assertion that humans were animals to the movement's formation. Finally, it disputes claims that concern for animals served a "displacement" function until some human reforms became socially acceptable.
William J. Shultz
This study attempts to continue for the brief period from 1910 to 1922 Professor Roswell C. McCrea's descriptive survey of the Humane Movement in the United States, which covered the distinctive features of legislation and organized efforts for animal and child protection. Professor McCrea gave an outline presentation of the historical background and development for at least a generation prior to 1909-1910. While making free use of Professor McCrea's materials and in some cases restating his conclusions, I have made no attempt to cover the same ground, but have begun this study with the year 1909-1910 where he left off.