Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1890-08-16
AS TO VACCINATION.
An English Anti Tries to Rob Jen-
ner of His LaurelS.
he is OPPOSED TO INOCULATION,
But His Arguments are COntroverted by
Facts Which Prove That
VACCINATION DOES PREVENT SMALLPOX

The question whether vaccination is really
protective against smallpox has once more
come to the front, SAYS writer in the Lon
don Saturday ReUieD. Until quite recently
the members of the medical profession were
unanimous in their belief in its efficacy, but
recently two Psychologists of undoubted
ability (Drs. Creighton and Crookshank)
have ranged themselves on the side OF the
anti-vaccinationists. On this account the
appointment of royal commission to in
quire into the matter is fully justified. OF
the enormous decrease of the number of per-
SONS attacked by smallpox in proportion to
the population during the last 30 years there
is no doubt; indeed, it is now quite excep-
tional to see any one badly pitted by this
disease. Whether this improved state Of
things be due to the protective influence of
vaccination or TO other causes is the main
point to be investigated by the commission.
The book we are about to consider is by DIR.
Crookshank, and he tells US in his preface
that a copy of it has been sent to each MEM
Der of the commission.
As the information upon which DR..
Crookshank has formed his opinions with
regard to vaccination is mainly contained in
the second volume of his work, we will
refer to it first. We there find reprints of
Jenner's celebrated Inquiry" and of many
other papers on the practice of incubation
with vaccine lymph and on cowpox. We
also find reports on three spontaneous out
breaks of cowpox, two in diaries at Eysines
in 1881 and 1888, and one at Cricklade in
1887, reported on by the author. We cannot
speak too highly of the judiclous care with
which these papers have been selected.
SMALLPOX INCUBATION
was rendered illegal in England in 1S40, and
will not be again revived. In the fourth
chapter is described the system by which
DIR. Haygarth proposed to limit the spread
of smallpox. He must have been a man of
great acuteness, having fully recognized, as
early as 1777, that this disease was always
spread by infection or contagion, and never
originated de novo. He advocated isola-
tion, cleanliness and fresh air-indeed, very
much the means in use at the present
day; but we have, of course. in addition num-
berless disinfectants, and are cognizant of
the destructive effect OF high temperature
upon the materies morbi. In the chapter
headed "The Tradition of the Dairymaids"
evidence is produced which appears 10 US to
show that, not only was an attack of cow
pox believed to be protective against the
more deadly disease, but that it really was
so, the majority of smallpox inoculations
failing in those who had suffered from the
milder disease. The main object of this
chapter is to show that the inoculation OF
cowpox was known and practiced before Jen-
ner's advocacy of it. The proof seems COM
plete that Benjamin Jesty, Dorsetshire
farmer inoculated his wife and children with
cowpox as early as IVA, he himself having
suffered from the disease by accident Not
only so, but also the faith of Mr.. Jesty in
the protective influence Of this proceeding
was SO great that he allowed himself and
his sons to be inoculated with the virus of
smallpox-rhe result of such inoculations
being negative. Many pages are then de-
voted to the consideration of the life and
letters of Edward Jenner. Throughout the
whole of this portion of the book, desire
on the part of the author is evident to de-
stroy Jenner's character as a scientific, and
even as an honest man. He wishes to
persuade US that vaccination is of
no use, and that, even ii it
were, the credit of its introduction should
not be accorded to Jenner.
NOT A PROPHET.
A specimen of the cotemporary criticism
of the new practice and its reputed author
is quoted in the shape of long paper by
Mr.. Birch, one of the ablest opponents of
vaccination and most ardent supporter of
smallpox incubation. Mr.. Birch was not
happy as q prophet, for, writing in 1906, he
says: 81 entertain no doubt, therefore, but
haf aho III what ua nf
popular opinion favorable to the cause of
vaccination vanish into thin air." Eighty
four years after this utterance popular opin-
ion is more favorable to this cause than ever
before. His dictum, "Never to sacrifice e6-
perience to experiment" would scarcely
commend itself to the mind of modern
physiologist. Mr.. Birch makes much of
the fact that smallpox does occur in those
who have been vaccinated, and sometimes
severely, but does not appear acquainted
with the equally indubitable fact that small
pox sometimes attacks the same person
twice. This should not surprise us when
we remember that second and even third
seizures Of analogous diseases, such as
measles and scarlet fever, are not uncom-
mon. We believe that no instance of one
who had been efficiently vaccinated second
time, and subsequently suffered from small
DO4. mas D66u huOWu W OCCuLs 4iALs olOh
accuses the Jennerian Society of having
placed posters on the chapels and Sunday
schools contrasting the mild symptoms re-
sulting from vaccination with the severe
ones following smallpox inoculation. If
this were really done, it was certainly
an unworthy and undignifed proceed
ing. Further on in his paper he
insinuates that Jenner left London to
escape from unpleasant questions about the
new form of incubation; whereas Jenner
himself tells us that he did so because ne was
unable to obtain sufficient practice to permit
him to keep up the expensive house which he
had injudiciously taken. Though we admit
Jenner's error in thinking that cowpox
originated from the grease OF horses heels,
we are hardly prepared to agree with Mr..
Birch in attributing it to itch on the hands
of the mixers. The following appeal to
sentiment seems to rs entirely out of place
in a paper which is intended to be a model
of logical argument, "And do not let us so
inhumanly submit our babes, while smiling
in the mothers face. to we know not what. -
JENNER UPHELD.
In his dealings with the National Vac
cine Establishment Jenner wished to be too
autocratic, and his resignation of the post of
Director was a mistake; but his assurance
that ne would, nevertheless, be always ready
to afford it any assistance in his power was
large-minded and dignifed. Jenner ap-
pears to have disbelieved in Jesty's antici-
patton of him in the incubation of cowpox,
and was, perhaps, not so careful as he
might have been to inquire into the matter.
However, it was he, and not Jesty, who,
whether for good or evil, fought the battle
in favor Of vaccination, and caused the
practice to be taken up almost throughout
the world. His paper on the natural his
tory of cowpox Brightly rejected by the
Royal Society was an ill-considered and