The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1881-02-05

We are not responsible for opinions eAprossed by cor
respondents, our columns being open to all for the dis
cussion of public affairs from every point Of view.
Correspondents will please observe that all letters
must be authenticated by the names Of the writers, not
necessarily for publication, but as a guarantee Of good
faith.
To The Editor of the Pacific q numerical Adre, is9.
SIR ny p2par of TIE 22nd inst. contains a
leader upon the subject Of vaccination, urging upon
perants especially the ace .sity Of prompt conformity
with the law in protecting their children : against
one of the most horrible and most infectious of
diseases"
In your solicitude to : c reduced to a minimum the
danger of infection from small pox [ entirely concur;
but differ entirely with you in your advocacy of
compulsory vaccination, considering the authorita-
tive admissions which have been made regarding the
probability of leprosy having heretofore b en- largely
disseminat ! by the practice. From personal ob~ei-
walton, and from what has been said by medical pract i
TONERS. l am led to infer that vaccination. as
practised in the past, ha7 teen almost as effective in
Developing the one as it has been in securing immun'-
~ from the other. And, has not the long delayed en-
forcement of the law ben dependent upon q
conviction somewhat akin to this? If mot, or upon
some objection almost equally grave, the authoriti
have been long and most VIGOROUSLY derelict N the
performance of a solemn duty.
The supposed discovery Of yaccin syphilis in a few
individuals not many years back -et half England
against vaccination. Though the danger however
was repr ented by the most r p ctable medical
ournals as but infnitesual, and while they en-
deayored strennously to prevent unnecessary
obloauy being thrown upon the practice Of vaccin-
alton, their was no talk Of the nee sity of strainiug
the law. and riding rough shod over the popular
preiudice. but. the danger was admitted. az was
al-o the right of the public to demand protection
from it . and the question was asked. not what steps
the Government intended taking in the way Of
coercion. but, " what steps the Government Intended
to take to provide that the population shall not plead
danger as u bar to vaccination Of their children.
If few ca : of syphiiitic inrocuIation among 50
dense a popula ion could give rise to go marked feel
ing of unea--, have the P ople here. considering the
history of the past, then, no cause to plead denger as
an excu-e for nonconformity with the law ? Aud i
they have, by what principle Of justice can the au.
thoriti-- uphold a re- 1rt to coercion-'' TO mcclure
which viii bring the informer's hateful oLice into
play g? Public danger a plc in favor Of com.
pulsion is but a hollow sound. when the authoriti.
can set aside such considerations at their conven.
fence
Want of Skin and lack Of appreciation Of th
responsibilities of their Offices by some public vac
cinators of the past, have led many to look will
suspicion upon promi-suor- vaccination. AMI hav
no small influence in determining the resort of
large proportion Of the foreign portion of the com
munity to private practitioners to receive III
required infection. And it vii take time, and
more intelligent and conscientious selection of vacei
oo.1g han that Which once saw no objection t