Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1900-01-20
BEFORE BOARD
or EDUCATION.
Antl-COmpuIsOry accinatiOn League
Objects to Unjust Discrimination,
QUESTION DECIDED TONIGHT
city Attorney Holds that unyaceinat.
ed Children May he Kept out of
sehool-Harrington Denies H.


sehool-Harrington Denies It.
No meeting OF the Board OF Education
was held last night for lack Of q
quorum. there being but FIVE members
present namely. Messrs. WILSON, Nell
den, Walker, Newman aud Giauque.
The meeting was called TO decide
whether schools should be opened on
Monday next, and to decide the Ques-
ton OF prohibiting the attendance Of
unvacoinated children at school. An
adjournment was taken til this even
ing when the question will come Up
before the whole board. Those who
were present cautiously stayed TN a
late hour listening 10 representations
! by ant-vaceinatlonists against pro-
hibiting children who were not vaccl-
mated from attending the schools. The
| Compulsory Vaccination League
was represented by Nephi Y. Sconcld,
| Jos. II. Parry and John +. Cox, headed
by Attorney Dan Harrington.
THE ANTS" ARE HEARD.
Mr.. Harrington said that he and
/ Judge Powers had been retained TO
make representations TO the board and,
II necessary, 20 take legal steps TO. IL
possible, prevent the board from clos
| Ing the school 10 unvaccinated chill
dren Mr.. Harrington gave 1t as his
/ opin on that the Board OF Health had
not the power TO compel the board OF
! eduiation TO make such an unjust dis
/ elimination, and that the latter would
| not be justified in complying with such
a demand II It was made. lie held that
such a measure was wrong. unjust ana
! unconstitutional. as II deprived the
children Of an inherent right without
due process OF law"
John h. Cox followed wish a lengthy
argument against vaccination, charac-
terizing 1t as an abomlnabe practice
which not only did not prevent small
pox. but actually made the parties sub
hitting 10 II more susceptible to small
pox, besides impianting other noxious
diseases into the healthy bodies Of chill
dren. He cOntended that the board OF
health could not make laws. The leg
isature refused TO enact compulsory
vaccination law. IL the board Of health
a higher power than the legislature?
Can they usurp power explicitly de-
MED them by the legislature?
Mr.. Neden resented the statement
that vacclnated children accountability.
They may be made unwell, but not UNI
healthy. I've been vaccinated ak
times. Would you call me unhealthy"
lie then explained the scientific theory
OF vaccination, and showed how II diff
fered from the old method
j. II. Parry argued that the surgical
operation Of vaccination was not a
sanitary measure and In opposing COM
pulsOry vaccination the league was
fighting for the personal liberties OF
the people. The constitution and laws
of our state provide for the schooling
Of all the children within her borders
there was no exception, the deaf, dumb
and blind alike enjoying the provisions
made for education, which was COM
pulsory Neither the board Of health
nor the board Of education could make
an unjust discrimination against
healthy unyacclnated children, as they
had no right to make vaccination or
any other surgical operation prerequl-
site or condition of eligibility to the
benefits OF school
According 10 the usual fees Of physl- !
clans. 81 Is fair price for vaccination.
what kind, then, he asked, In the city |
giving that costs two for quarter? |
Mr.. Parry was given 10 understand |
that the vaccination furnished By the |
city Is Just as good as that BY the best |
physician In the city.
He continued by saying that much |
sickness and suffering, and one sus-
pici0us death, was attributed 10 the |
effects Of vaccination. "Oh. | know |
the doctors attribute II to some thing |
else, but the common people believe Il |
Is vaccination.
CITY ATTORNEYS VIEWS.
City Attorney Stephens reiterated his
written opinion 10 the effect that the
board OF education had no alternative
but 10 obey the mandatory order Of the
board Of health The only way. II the
law was a bad one, was to repeal IT,
and take away the powers given to the
board OF health Until that was done
the board Of education had no alterna-
tive but 10 obey 10.
The board OF health does not say that
all school children shall be vacrlnated,
but II does say that they shall not 20
TO school unless they are vaccinated.
The people have created this board
and given il this power. II We are not
satisfied with its action we can abolish
II in a legal way.
Nelden and Wilson said they would
obey the law, while Giauque and New
man thought the effect was eompul-
sorry vaccination, which was unlawful.
Mr.. Giauque took the position that
the board of health had the right 10
close the schools. but II had not the
power TO open them to one class and
not TO another.
BOARD WON'T RECEDE.
When an adjournment was taken till
tonight IL was understood that the pro-
Iestants and their counsel would have
! hearing by. the full heard. There
seemed however to be a feeling that
he board will not reccde from It's po-
iiti0n- II Is therefore pretty certain
hat the schools will open on Monday
% vaccinated children only, and that q
proceeding In inandamus viii be at
nee begun 20 compel the board OF edu-
'ation to allow all healthy children.
whether vacclnated or not. 10 attend
he schools. The district court viii be
Isked to hear the case as quickly az
'ossible. An appeal no matter how the
district judge decides. viii be taken 10
he supreme court and that tribunal /,
yill be requested TO give the case as
'aTly hearing as possible. II Is con-
eded by both sides that that Is the ]
My solution Of the difficulty. unless I
he board Of health mobiles its ruling {
m vaccination.