Dr. Thompson had no doubt that was the case, but it could have nothing to do with the improvement in St. Giles’s, as the sanitary habits of that place were not very advanced. Let them continue vaccination till small-pox was eradicated, and then they could do without it altogether. Small-pox had only originated once in the history of the world, and if they could only once stamp it out, it might never recur. His attention had been called to some figures which he had omitted to notice in regard to Sweden, where the mortality which was so strikingly reduced after the introduction of vaccination, that in one year there were only two deaths, again rose by degrees till it reached 2,000. This was owing to the carelessness of the people, who thought the disease had gone altogether, and neglected the continuance of vaccination. Strenuous efforts were again made when the mortality rose, and it was reduced rapidly, till there were only 41 deaths in one year.
At the conclusion of Dr. Thompson’s speech several gentlemen rose to put questions to Dr. Thompson, when Dr. Pearce asked permission of the chairman to reply to the two medical gentlemen who had just addressed them. Permission being obtained—
Dr. Pearce said, he felt happy in meeting his two professional brethren, Dr. Routh and Dr. Thompson, and discussing with them this important question; and he proposed in order to avoid taxing the memories of the audience, to mingle the two speeches, and to reply in the reverse order of their delivery, noticing first the concluding remarks of Dr. Thompson.
Dr. Thompson had, unhappily for the cause he advocated, referred to that well vaccinated country, Sweden, where every child born is vaccinated, and where compulsory vaccination has been in operation many years. Dr. Thompson had pointed out that small-pox had declined in that country, in consequence of vaccination, adducing the fact, that while in 1838 the mortality was 1,805, in 1839 it was 1,934, it fell in 1840 to 650, and in 1842 to 58; indeed, in 1846 only two deaths from small-pox were recorded, and this, said Dr. Thompson, was the result of vaccination; but if he had continued his inquiry to later years, he would have found, as he will see there in that table, that the small mortality was owing to the fact that the epidemic had done its work and taken its departure, but that when another epidemic came, the mortality was again raised, and in 1849—31 died; in 1850—1,376 died; in 1851 no less than 2,488 died;—the heaviest mortality for forty years though every inhabitant of Sweden was vaccinated. [11]
And now for Ireland, on which so much stress has been laid of late. You tell us, that vaccination has extinguished small-pox in that country. I deny it. For while it is quite true that small-pox is absent—this is not the result of vaccination—for the Registrar General’s returns shew that there is less vaccination in Ireland than in England, and far less than in Scotland. You flatter yourselves that you have put out small-pox by vaccination. In regard to Ireland the fact is, that inoculation has been clandestinely carried on in that country, the people having more confidence in the protecting power of small-pox, a disease which is human, than in vaccination, a disease of a brute. They have this instinct, and this instinct is right in the mother who shudders at the idea of cow-pox. You overrule this instinct which is natural, with your reason, you impose a substitute which is revolting. Small-pox is absent from Ireland, but is the mortality less? No, on the contrary under the operation of a natural law which I have illustrated in my essay on vaccination, to which Mr. Snell has alluded, scarlatina has displaced small-pox, and the general mortality has increased. It is a general rule that when small-pox is present you have a low mortality, and when it is absent you have a higher mortality. Small-pox is absent from England, but look at your frightful mortality from scarlatina. [12] In the last two years, I estimate the mortality from scarlatina at 40,000 per annum, and small-pox only 1,500. And what is the nature of this process which you call vaccination. Dr. McOubrey has already told you this evening, that the disease which Jenner implanted was not natural cow-pox, but a disease which developed itself in phagædenic ulcerations. You follow Dr. Blane who advocated vaccination direct from the heifer to avoid the admitted dangers arising from arm to arm vaccination—the diseases transplanted therewith. You tell us to-night, that vaccination with cow-pox will prevent small-pox. Did Jenner tell you this? Let me read to you his words at page 7 of his work, published in 1798, he cautions you against trusting to spontaneous cow-pox, lest you should be deceived into a false security.
I will read the passage from Jenner, “It is necessary to observe that pustulous sores frequently appear spontaneously on the nipples of cows, and instances have occurred of the hands of servants employed in milking, being affected with sores in consequence, and even of their feeling an indisposition from absorption. These pustules are of a much milder nature than those which arise from that contagion which constitutes the true cow-pox. They are always free from the bluish or livid tint, so conspicuous in the pustules of that disease. No erysipelas attends them, nor do they show any phagædenic disposition, as in the other case, but terminate in a scab, without creating any apparent disorder in the cow. But this disease is not to be considered as similar in any respect to that of which I am treating, as it is incapable of producing any specific effects on the human constitution. However, it is of the greatest consequence to point it out here, lest the want of discrimination should occasion an idea of security, from the infection of small-pox which might prove delusive.” Now, mark the words—an idea of security—it is an idea, it has no reality; and for this idea you commit to prison mothers, whose only crime is to refuse to obey the mandate of a faculty, at whose bidding the Act of Parliament, which disgraces the statute book was passed. This spurious vaccination, this vaccination is Dr. Blane’s, it is a sham, a delusion. Have we not proof? Appeals have been made to-night to the statistics of the Small-pox Hospital, drawn up by Mr. Marson, its surgeon, in which he very ingeniously makes it appear, that although 84 of every hundred cases are found to have been vaccinated, the disease small-pox is modified by vaccination—this is a new tangled dodge. Mr. Marson tells us that the mortality in the “unprotected” is 34 or 35 per cent., that in modified cases it varied from 24 down to 7 per cent., and that these modified cases were among the vaccinated. Stress is laid on the importance of the number of the cicatrices. While Jenner said one puncture was sufficient, these men tell us that four, five, even six on each arm are necessary in order to ensure efficient protection. One dart of the serpent’s sting is not enough.
This ingenious division of the mortality into groups, according to the number of cicatrices is a delusion. Why, Mr. Marson tells us, with regard to the ‘modified’ cases said to have been vaccinated, but having no marks of vaccination, that they “must have received a protective influence as regards fatality, which would have been greater, but for the disease having been influenced by vaccination.”
So it is assumed that when small-pox occurs mildly in the vaccinated—that the disease is modified thereby. The fact being that it depends on the natural susceptibility of the subject and not on vaccination. This different susceptibility in the attacked was pointed out by Rhazes, an Arabian physician, centuries before vaccination was thought of; but what happens when small-pox occurs in a severe form? Let us see—here is Dr. Russell Reynolds’ System of Medicine, and in it, vol. 1, 2nd edition, page 229, is an article by Mr. Marson on small-pox. He tells us that 104 cases of the severe (corymbose) form of small-pox were admitted into the hospital—of these 29 were unvaccinated, 74 were found vaccinated (mark the greater number were vaccinated as usual)—of the 29 unvaccinated, 13 died; of the 74 vaccinated, 32 died;—shewing a difference in the mortality of less than 3 per cent. Of the 104 cases one only had been inoculated, that case died. Here then we see that with all your boasted protection the great majority are found with the mark of the beast on the arm, yet they die at the rate of 42 per cent.
Reference had been made to the diminution of small-pox in the parish of St. Giles’s. At a meeting in Kentish Town some months ago, Dr. Ross adduced what he thought to be evidence of the effect of vaccination in St. Giles’s. At that meeting he, Dr. Pearce, had combated Dr. Ross’s argument by shewing that the diminished mortality from small-pox was owing to its absence and its displacement by scarlatina.
Dr. Seaton’s statistics had been quoted to-night in proof of the advantage of legislation on the subject. That well paid officer of the Privy Council had drawn up a table for the Epidemiological Society which he, Dr. Pearce, had republished in his essay, and which he begged now to hand to Dr. Routh and Dr. Thomson for their inspection.