Definition
Sterility is the permanent or temporary incapacity to procreate — to conceive or bear a child. In legal usage, the term has operated primarily in the context of marriage law, where it has been relevant to grounds for annulment or dissolution of marriage, and in medical-legal contexts involving proof of physical incapacity. Unlike impotency, which refers to the inability to engage in sexual intercourse, sterility refers specifically to the inability to reproduce, even where intercourse is possible.
---
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): The state or quality of being sterile.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): The quality or condition of being sterile; infecundity; also, the state of being free from germs or spores.
The ordinary English term captures biological infertility broadly and extends to the unrelated meaning of freedom from microbial contamination. In legal usage, sterility is narrower and carries specific doctrinal weight: not every instance of infertility triggers legal consequences, but sterility that is incurable and that existed at the time of marriage has historically been treated as a ground for annulment when linked to impotency or fraud. The germ-free sense of "sterile" has no legal meaning cognate to this doctrine.
---
Common Confusion
Sterility and impotency are frequently conflated in historical legal sources, and some older authorities use the terms interchangeably. The distinction matters: impotency, in classic marriage law, denotes inability to consummate the marriage through sexual intercourse, and was the recognized canonical and common-law ground for annulment. Sterility — inability to reproduce — was not independently a ground for annulment in most common-law jurisdictions unless it was inseparable from impotency or was concealed in a way that grounded a fraud claim. Bouvier's draws the operative line clearly: sterility matters legally when it is incurable and arises from impotency. Researchers should not assume that historical sources using "sterility" as a ground for dissolution are recognizing pure barrenness as sufficient; they are almost always subsuming it within the impotency doctrine.
---
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers working in domestic relations, annulment history, or medical jurisprudence will encounter sterility as a term embedded within — and often subordinate to — impotency doctrine. Several navigational points:
First, the legal significance of sterility in historical sources is almost entirely marriage-law specific. Outside that context, the term appears in tort and contract settings only incidentally — for example, warranty claims in livestock transactions where sterility of an animal was a defect. Do not assume a marriage-law framework when the term appears in commercial or agricultural records.
Second, the curable/incurable distinction is crucial. Bouvier's flags it directly: curable sterility carried no legal weight as a ground for dissolution, while incurable sterility connected to impotency could. Historical medical-legal texts, including Fodéré's Médecine Légale (cited by Bouvier), are the evidentiary backstop for this distinction. Courts in annulment proceedings sometimes required medical testimony on this point.
Third, in modern domestic relations law, sterility as an independent legal category has largely collapsed. Annulment grounds have been narrowed or displaced by no-fault divorce in most U.S. jurisdictions, and sterility per se is rarely pleaded. Where it appears in contemporary materials, it is more likely in the context of reproductive rights, assisted reproduction contracts, or tort claims (e.g., wrongful sterilization). Researchers crossing from historical to modern sources should be alert to this shift in doctrinal home.
Fourth, the Rapalje & Lawrence entry cross-references a defined usage at 2 Maule & Selwyn 359 — an English King's Bench reporter from the early nineteenth century. That citation suggests the term had sufficient doctrinal specificity to warrant judicial definition in English law, which is relevant for tracing reception into American common law.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
The historical dictionaries converge on a tight, consistent definition: barrenness; incapacity to produce a child. There is no meaningful divergence among the sources on the core meaning. Black's (both editions) offers the shortest treatment, essentially defining sterility by reference to reproductive incapacity without elaboration. Rapalje & Lawrence adds the cross-reference to impotency and the English reporter citation, signaling that the term had been judicially defined. Bouvier's provides the most doctrinal depth, distinguishing curable from incurable sterility and anchoring the marriage-dissolution consequence in incurable sterility arising from impotency.
What the historical dictionaries do not address is sterility outside marriage law — in contract, property, or criminal contexts — which is consistent with the term's actual doctrinal footprint. They also do not engage with the evidentiary standards for proving sterility in court, which were contested and medically contingent. For that dimension, researchers must go to contemporary medical jurisprudence treatises rather than the law dictionaries.
---
Jurisdictional Note
The legal treatment of sterility as a ground for annulment varied across American states and between civil-law and common-law systems. In jurisdictions with ecclesiastical-law inheritance, incurable impotency (which could encompass sterility) was a recognized ground for nullity. Some American states codified impotency-based annulment but did not separately enumerate sterility. Civil-law jurisdictions following French or Spanish influence, including Louisiana, may reflect the French médecine légale tradition visible in Bouvier's citation to Fodéré.
---