In the spring of 1878, Anthony Comstock received word that a young woman who had attended one of Saras lectures in a church in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, had used a vaginal syringe that she bought from Sara, and then ulcerated her uterus. A doctor took care of her and she recovered. Anthonys accounts of what happened are convoluted. The most important man in the lives of 19th-century women, he did not understand the difference between contraception and abortion and frequently conflated them in his arrest logbook accounts.
In the June/July 1878 issue, she ran a notice for a new item to be sold to Physiologist readers. It was called the Comstock Syringe. The ad stated that it was the same one Sara had sold Comstock himself. It was especially adapted to purposes of cleanliness, and the cure and prevention of disease. Sara concluded, We trust that the sudden popularity brought to this valuable syringe by the benevolent agency of the enterprising Mr. Comstock, will prove to suffering womanhood the most beneficent act of his illustrious life.
A later Comstock syringe ad mentioned her lawsuit as a selling point, to let purchasers know that to buy a douche named after Comstock was a form of political action. It said the syringe was used by married women for the judicious and healthy regulation of the female functions (ode for preventing pregnancy) and was a Blessing to Womankind.
Comstock was so furious to see a vaginal douche being advertised under his name that he got a different grand jury to indict her, without informing them that her case had previously been dismissed. The assistant district attorney secured a nolle prosequi, declining to prosecute, and admonished him for withholding information and not going through the proper channels.
More at:
https://lithub.com/how-anthony-comstock-enemy-to-women-of-the-gilded-age-attempted-to-ban-contraception/
Alito continues in his tradition of referring to theocratic misogynists throughout history as a means for envisioning the future.