The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1869-09-04 00:00:00

THE VACCINATION QUESTION.

A public meeting was held in London on Monday,
in the Vestry Hall, Mileiend, to corsider the present
law id compulsory vaccination. Captain Campbell in
the chair. Amongst those present were Mr. Edmond
Beales, Dr. Pearce, Dr. Collins, Mr. It. B. Gibbs,
Mr. Stephens (bon sec. to the East London Branch of
the Anti• Compulsory Vaccination League). and Mrs.
Ann Sipple, who had been imprisoned unduly.
The Chairman said he had always had doubts upon
the value id vaccination, but he thought it better to
leave the matter in the hands of the medical men, who
could speak with wore weight on the question than he
could.
_

Mr. Stephens read some letters from gentlemen who
had been asked to be present. He stated that a gentle.
man had sent him a sovereign to pay the costs of Hodge
who had been I day sent to gaol for neglecting to have
his child vaccinated. The man had ret used to have Ids
costs paid, and had gone to gal on principle. Mr.
Mundella had expressed himself recently as favourable
to inquiry, but not to an immediate repeal of the law.
They had established an East-end branch of the league,
and those who paid a shilling a year to its funds would
be advised how to protect themselves against the law.
Mr. Rymer proposed the first resolution, which re-
commended resistance to the law until repealed, and
objected to the expenditure of the money of the rate-
payers in prosecuting under the Act, and urged the
guardians against the tyrannical dictation of the Poor-
law Board and the medical department of the Privy
Council.
Mr. Hawes seconded the resolution._ . _

Mr. R. B. Gibbs supported the resolution. He said
that an inquiry had been promised by Lord Palmerston
in 1853, but no inquiry had ever taken place. Lord
Lyttelton had written to him to say that the reason of
his having introduced the bill for compulsory vaccitia-
tion in 1853 was that he considered the beneficial
effects of vaccination to be matters of common noto-
riety. The Lancet was attacking the Pall Mall Gatette
because the latter wanted that the truth should coma
out. The Pall Mall Gazette said that thirty years ago
there was no question as to the value of vaccination.,
but the Lancet said that there had always been oppo-
nents to vaccination. He was of opinion that vaccina-
tion lowered the standard of vitality, and hence the
Engliah and Russians suffered fearfully from cholera,
in the Crimea, while the Turks, who were not vac-
cinated were scarcely attacked. Dr. Woodville, who
was a great advocate for vaccination, died at fifty-three
years of small-pox in the Small-pox Hospital, in 1805,
notwithstanding his vaccination, before the lymph had
been (as is now said to be the case) injured by trans-
mission through so many human bodit s. The Lancet
stated, that vaccination failed front many causes, and
said that the sooner it was understood that vaccination
gave no absolute immunity from small-pox the better.
It also states that this 1411 would not be successful be-
cause it made no provision for the supply of pure lymph.
At a later period it urged the necessity of passing
an Act which should destroy the small-pox. It was
said that small-pox was extinct in Scotland, and
yet Prince Arthur caught it there. No doubt the
Queen's son had been properly vaccinated, and yet he
had the small-pox so sever. ly that he required the at-
, tendance of three doctors. The resolution recommended
, revolutionary action, hut the Act was a revolutionary
measure. (Cheers). There had been parents before
there were Parliament+, and this was an attack on the
rights of parents. Sir J. C. Jervoise had discontinued
attendance at quarter or petty Seishsls, as he would sot
enforce this law. Mr. Ayrton had voted avainet the
bill- (eheere)—as had Mr. Barrow, who Was 81 years (4
age. He wanted to have Mr. Ayrton's Ilan& strength-
ened before next session.

Dr. Collins also supported the resolution. He bad
been a public vaccinator for twenty years, and had
found that two-thirds of the children passed through
the disorder with little or no distress. But in others
there was much suffering, and in many cases latent die-
eases were deceit-pod. Glandular swelling and sore,
burst out in many. In the smallpox epidemic in 1843
many thousand., who had been vaccinated died of on All
pox. He bail tried many experiments which showed
that there was no immunity from small pox to he
obtained from vaccination. The bill had been with-
drawn by Mr. Bruce, but when Lord Derby came into
power it was found in the Home Office, and as it pro-
vided seven or eight places of from £BOO to £l,OOO a
year each it was too good a thing not to be pushed on,
and at two in the morning this bill was passed in the
House of Commons.

Dr. Pearce also supported the resolution, and said
small-pox would have died out had it not been that in-
oculation bad been introduced. Eighty-three per cent.
of the patients in the Small-pox Hospital had been
vaccinated. He read statistics to show that ow-sins.
tion was a failure, and referred to the letter of Dr. Blanc
which had appeared in the Daily Ttlegraph, Aug. 16.
where it was stated that vacciria Was a disease of
the cow, and again it was recommended to vaccinate
from a healthy heifer. How coMd a healthy animal
give disease? He showed from recent statietics that
in Sweden, which was pointed to by Dr. Simon as a
well vaccinated country, small-pox bad greatly in.
creased, there baying been in one year above 2,000
deaths from Mail- pox, a greater mortality than during
any other year of the century.
Mr. Edmond Beales also supported the resolution,
saying that he regretted there was no one present to
advocate the Vaccination Law, which he thought was
a disgrace ti the Legislature.
The resolution was agreed to unanimously, and a
committee was appointed to wait on the Board of
Guardians, after which the meeting concluded with the
usual vote of thanks.