[1158] From the Second Report of the Registrar-General, Lond. 1840, p. 180.
[1159] 1840.
| 1st qr. | 2nd qr. | 3rd qr. | 4th qr. | |||||
| Liverpool | 172 | 184 | 90 | 85 | ||||
| Bath | 25 | 42 | 22 | 8 | ||||
| Exeter | — | — | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Bristol | 6 | 54 | 49 | 76 | ||||
| Clifton | 11 | 28 | 22 | 42 |
[1160] Douglass to Colden, 1 May, 1722, in Massach. Hist. Soc. Collect. Series 4, vol. II. p. 169.
[1161] Philip Rose, M.D., Essays on the Smallpox. London, 1724, p. 76.
[1162] Rev. R. Houlton, App. to A Sermon in Defence of Inoculation, Chelmsford, 1767, p. 59: “For, had the indictment been found, he would have assuredly nonsuited his enemies, and have proved beyond a possibility of doubt that he never brought into Chelmsford a patient who was capable of infecting a bystander, notwithstanding such person would convey infection by inoculation. However paradoxical this may seem, it is truth, and would have been proved to a demonstration.”
[1163] Darwin, Animals and Plants under Domestication, II. 356: “From these facts we clearly see that the quantity of the peculiar formative matter which is contained within the spermatozoa and pollen-grains is an all-important element in the act of fertilization, not only for the full development of the seed, but for the vigour of the plant produced from such seed.”
[1164] J. C. Lettsom, M.D., A Letter to Sir Robert Barker, F.R.S. and G. Stackpoole, Esq. upon General Inoculation. London, 1778, p. 8.
[1165] W. Black, M.D., Observations Medical and Political on the Smallpox, etc. London, 1781, p. 103.
[1166] “But, in the cowpox, no pustules appear, nor does it seem possible for the contagious matter to produce the disease from effluvia, or by any other means than contact, and that probably not simply between the virus and the cuticle; so that a single individual in a family might at any time receive it without the risk of infecting the rest, or of spreading a distemper that fills a country with terror.”