Letter from Thomas J. Horan to Jack Molloy (London)
(345/96/157) (Copy)

I wish to refer to your teleprinter message No. 7 of the 1st January, 1952,¹ regarding an application for the issue of a passport in respect of the infant [matter redacted] who was surrendered sometime ago by the Rev. Mother Casimir, Superioress, St. Bridget’s Orphanage, Eccles Street, Dublin, to [matter redacted] of the United States army and his wife, [matter redacted], and brought by them to Great Britain without a travel document.

I was struck by the following phrases in your message viz. ‘the papers appear to be in order, the child being illegitimate, and the consent of its mother and the Rev. Mother of St. Bridget’s Orphanage, Eccles Street, Dublin, are attached’ – ‘we feel that the passport application should be granted as all the necessary conditions appear to have been complied with’.

In this case the child was surrendered to the Rev. Mother of the Orphanage and she in turn surrendered it to the [matter redacted], so that as you say ‘the papers appear to be in order’ and ‘the necessary conditions appear to have been complied with’. That is quite true, as far as it goes, but, as the result of our experience here over the past couple of years, it does not go far enough. You will remember that in the Jane Russell case² the papers were also in order, even more so in order perhaps, and yet that did not keep us out of trouble.

In dealing with these cases, I think we have to remember what I believe is one of the fundamental principles of law, namely that people cannot surrender their natural rights and obligations. There is no law in this country whereby a person may surrender this child to anyone else; to put it another way we have no adoption act. It is, at the same time, true, however, that there is no law which says that a person may not surrender his child to the care and custody of another party. The consents which you forwarded in this case for our inspection, of which we see plenty of specimens in dealing with such cases, are alright as far as they go but one can never tell but that, supposing one of them were produced before the Supreme Court, it might not be held repugnant to the Constitution. You may remember that, prior to the [matter redacted] case, at all events, the undertaking given by a non-Catholic spouse that he would have his children brought up in the Catholic faith had no value in law on the theory that the father could not surrender his natural right and obligation to bring up his children as he saw fit. That is what I mean by saying that people cannot surrender their natural rights.

The vast majority of the persons to whom children are surrendered for the eventual purpose of adoption are American citizens and the child eventually travels with its adopting parents to the USA where adoption proceedings are in due course initiated; but the child may not enter the USA without a passport on which a visa is endorsed. We come into the picture because it is we who give the passport without which the child cannot travel to the USA. Now, while the consents to which you refer are quite alright, supposing it happened that the child was surrendered to persons who, on arrival in the USA, proceeded to sell it off to the highest bidder, with consequent press publicity etc. It is we who would be held responsible as it is we who would have to answer parliamentary questions, face a press campaign here and so on. I have taken an extreme case for my example but the fact is that, if any child who left this country for adoption in America figured in an unsavoury press campaign, racket or other exposure, it is this Department that would face the music. Hence the consents to which I refer are not sufficient for our purpose and we here would not issue a passport on the production of these documents alone.

Briefly, we have to bear in mind the following additional considerations in dealing with applications for the issue of passports in such cases:-

1. Are the adopting parents fit and proper persons (same religion as child, financially solvent, good morals, etc.)?
2. Do they genuinely intend to keep the child, rear it as their own and adopt it according to law?

To satisfy ourselves on this point we try to get as many references as possible on the adopting parents and it is our experience that the best kind of reference is a reference from an organisation and not a reference from individuals though we do also accept the latter. There is for instance in each diocese in the United States a branch of the organisation called the Catholic Charities which gives the most complete ‘vetting’ of a couple intending to adopt a child. If they recommend the couple, we can be quite satisfied that the recommendation is sound since they go into such matters as family background, housing conditions, finances and so on, as well as character, etc.

You are, presumably, aware of the existence of the orphanages run by St. Patrick’s Guild in Abbey Street and Navan Road, Dublin. I think it was Sr. Elizabeth of this Institute that first drew our attention to the existence of the Catholic Charities. No child leaves her care unless the adopting couple is recommended by Catholic Charities. In her case also she has the specific approval of His Grace the Archbishop of Dublin for each specific case of the surrender of a child to such an adopting couple. All this, you will agree, is extremely satisfactory from our point of view. In dealing with other orphanages run by religious orders throughout the country, we have, I think, successfully endeavoured to get them to do what St. Patrick’s Guild does, viz. get each adopting couple ‘vetted’ by the Catholic Charities or some similar Catholic organisation and not merely content themselves with references given by individual persons.

I shan’t bother you with details of how the Protestant orphanages in this country conduct their business but from what I have seen I am satisfied that they are extremely careful in surrendering children for adoption.

Another point to bear in mind in this case is this. The adopting parents when bringing a child to America must, before they can get a visa for the child, file an affidavit of support undertaking that the child will never become a public charge. Such undertaking is alright as far as it goes but from our point of view it is worthless. Since the demand for children for adoption in the USA exceeds the supply, to put it crudely, there is no danger that such a child would ever become a public charge; it would simply be sold or surrendered to another couple.

If you would like to know anything further about this whole business, please let me know.