REPORT.
v
It is worthy of particular note that nearly as much of the cost of this species
of vaccination was paid from local funds as by Government, and that the cost of each
successful operation is considerably lower than that performed by a vaccine establishment.
The work done at Howrah, Hooghly, Serajgunge, Midnapore, Dacca, Backergunge, Seebsaugor,
Patna, Bankipore, Arrah, Tirhoot, Durbungah, Monghyr, and Chyebassa, is conspicuous.
The falling off at Dacca is owing to a smaller establishment, special efforts having been made
to meet an outbreak of small-pox in 1869-70. The success of this species of vaccination
depends entirely on the efforts of the civil medical officers, and some localties still show lamen-
tably feeble results. Any thing below 1,000 operations for each regular vaccinator should
not be considered a satisfactory result. It is but fair to civil surgeons, however, to state that
to promote vaccination properly demands a freedom from station duties and liberty to visit the
district which, while they have charge of the station jails as at present, is simplyimpossible.
Onerous station duties and responsibilities are incompatible with efficient district work.
26. Regulating inoculation where vaccination cannot be introduced.—This question was
raised by Dr. Charles in an elaborate paper which accompanied his report for the year 1868-69,
and printed as an appendix to the vaccination proceedings of that year. His arguments
are summed up in the 14th paragraph of the resolution on that report, dated 7th January
1870. Although the proposition was strongly condemned by my predecessor, His Honor the
Lieutenant-Governor decided to submit the questions involved, for report by commissioners
and district officers. These reports, in which the matter was fully discussed by the civil and
medical executive throughout the province, were studied by my predecessor, who found that
the weight of opinion was decidedly opposed to the advisability of giving official recognition
of any sort to inoculation, and the practicability of so regulating the practice of inoculation as
to render it harmless. The final resolution on the whole question was issued on the 13th
of November 1870 and is reproduced in the margin. While any official recognition
of inoculation is emphatically condemned, the following points are raised as worthy of
attention and inquiry :—
(a.)—Rendering vaccination self-supporting.
(b.)—Ascertaining the number of inoculators in each district, and registering
their names.
(c.)—Permitting inoculators to practise vaccination after having been instructed by
the Superintendent of Vaccination or Civil Surgeon.
(d.)—Encouraging villages or circles of villages to pay for the services of a
vaccinator.
All these several subjects form part of one scheme, whose object is to localize and render
independent of state subsidy vaccination, and gradually dispense with a special vaccine
executive.
27. Rendering vaccination self-supporting.—On this subject some correspondence has
passed. The matter was first broached by Dr. Charles in a letter dated 23rd October
1867. The essentials of his proposal were—
1st.—That vaccination should have become appreciated by the people.
2nd.—That having been taught to appreciate vaccination they should pay for it.
3rd.—That the best scheme of self-supporting vaccination consists in 'sending
trained vaccinators among the people under efficient supervision, and
permitting them to charge a fixed fee of one anna for each successful case.
4th.—That encouraging native practitioners to perform and charge for vaccination is
not a promising measure.
B