regshoe

Aww! OK, cool, I'll let you know when I'm starting on it. :)

As for other books to digitise—I'd like to do The Rebecca Rioter by E. A. Dillwyn (I have forgiven her for the ending of A Burglary, although not enough to digitise that one). Then there's Despised and Rejected, of which theseatheseatheopensea managed to find a usable scanned copy. Winifred Holtby's third book The Land of Green Ginger will be eligible next year (I haven't actually read it yet, but I'm sure it's good), and there's a copy on archive.org. So many possibilities!

But this is just me trying to reconstruct their arguments, maybe they actually were arguing from ‘is’ to ‘ought’?

Yes, they definitely were, according to Gould—and from what I've read elsewhere, misinterpretations of Darwin were pretty important in the development of eugenics as a movement. But you're right that in general the 'violation of NOMA' is not actually necessary in order to make bad moral arguments using science!