Fergus County argus. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1886-1946, 1905-03-29
COMPULSORY
VACCINATION
An important Opinion 10 Given by At.
torney General Albert J. oalen
on This subject.
POWERS OF HEALTH BOARD
Can Require Vaccination, land Children
Must Submit to lt-Enforcemen
Of the Order.

OJ Iue Or0ers
Compulsory vaccination of school
children means exactly what the term
implies in Montana, as pointed out in
an opinion by Attorney General Albert
J. Galen last week in response to a
question submitted to him by DR..
Thomas D. futile. secretary Of the
state board of health. vaccination
in the interest Of the public health"
he says, lis merely a condition prece-
dent to the child's right to attend
school; and the child can be COMPEL
ed to do both, viz, be vaccinated and
attend school"
In his letter to the attorney gen.
eral, DR.. Tuttle enclosed communi-
cation from DR.. H. H. Wilson, of Lew
istown, who propounded question as
to what could be done in the case of
child not exempt from attendance
upon district school, whose parents or
guardian refused to permit him to be
vaccinated despite the order of the
county board of health.
1T has been repeatedly held by the
supreme courts of the various states"
Attorney General Galen says in the
opinion, that the legislature has au-
thority to pass law providing that
no child shall be permitted to attend
school until vacicnated, or that the
legislature can by law delegate such
authority to boards of health or to
school trustees, and that such a law
or order is reasonable and necessary
for the preservation of the public
health. In fact, several Of the states
have gone further and held that the
legislature has power to delegate au.
thority to boards of health to issue
orders for every person to be vacci.
mated.
THE supreme court of Massachu.
sets held such statute, and the rules
and regulations made in pursuance
of such statute, constitutional. In a
very late case, not yet reported, the
supreme court of the United States
has affirmed the above decision. It
may also be mentioned in this con
nection that the law Of Massachusetts
provided for the compulsory education
of children by law similar to the
compulsory education law of our state
Under the above statutes and at
thorities, it is clear that the legisla'
ture of Montana has the constitution
al right to pass laws requiring all
children to be vaccinated before they
shall be permitted to attend school
or to delegate such authority to boards
of health to make and enforce such
rules and regulations. Has the legis
lature of Montana, in their delegation
Of authority to the state and county
boards of health, made it broad enough
to authorize such boards 70 issue rules
and regulations prohibiting children
from attending school, when such chill
dren are not vacinated?"
The attorney general quotes from
the laws of 1901, establishing a state
board of health, and continues:
From these sections it appears tina
whenever a case of smallpox is founs
in any part of the county the count.
board of health may establish reason
able sanitary rules and regulation
necessary to prevent any outbreak o
the disease, not only in that part o
the county, but for the entire county
II it is deemed necessary precautiol
to prevent spread of the disease owe
the county.
"Such being the authority delegate
to the boards of health, the next Ques
ton to be determined, under thes
sections, is whether rules and reguls
lions made by state and county board
of health, prohibiting school childre
from attending the public schools III
less vacinated, are 'needful and res
sonable sanitary rules and regulation:
necessary to prevent the outbreak
infectious or contagious diseases
That they are has been decided so o
ten by the courts, and even enacte
into law by so many of the states
that it can no longer be questioned.
Quoting the compulsory educatlo
law of 1903, the attorney genera
makes this comment: "The rules an
regulations requiring vaccination {
school children before they can atten
school, whenever there exists cas-
of smallpox, as mentioned above
this opinion, being reasonable an
necessary regulation for the preser
alton of the public health, as clearl
shown by the authorities cited, IN
failure or refusal of the parents, qua
dams, etc., to have their children va
cinated cannot be set up as leg
defense to an action against tnel
for violating such law requiring the
to send their children to school.
"Under our laws there are mar
things required of, and privileges q
MED. the individual in society Tor IL
good of society at large, Ut sucn law
those enacted for the preservation
the public health being among u
most important. It often happens tn
an individual in society objects 10
personal compliance with such law
but for the good Of the public heal
It is his duty to do so, and ne M
be punished for not SO doing. The "a
that any member of society. as an
diyidual, objects to any reasonat
law, or regulation made under autn'
ity of law, for the preservation OF I
public health, does not make such p
sonal objection to such q law or RET
lation a legal and valid defense 10
prosecution against him, or OF a
other valid law.
Laws which require children to
educated are reasonable and nee
sary laws enacted for the good OF
ciety. and the mere fact that an IN