Report from the Select Committee on the Vaccination Act (1867) : together with the proceedings of the Committee, minutes of evidence, appendix and index.
- Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Select Committee on Vaccination Act (1867)
- Date:
- 1871
Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: Report from the Select Committee on the Vaccination Act (1867) : together with the proceedings of the Committee, minutes of evidence, appendix and index. Source: Wellcome Collection.
Provider: This material has been provided by Royal College of Physicians, London. The original may be consulted at Royal College of Physicians, London.
40/558 (page 16)
![jV'r- 282. You mentioned that syphilis was some- IV, J.Collins, times dormant in the system ; is it a common case W,D’ for syphilis to he dormant in the system of a per- oR p son and not to show itself through life ?—In the 2‘ 23 ^Utliy cage 0f- children born of syphilitic parents it ' ' almost invariably makes its appearance in the first few weeks after birth ; but in some constitu- tions it may remain dormant for weeks or months. 283. You rather laid stress upon your opinion that vaccination, although it might not inoculate the child with syphilis, might cause syphilis, because syphilis was already dormant in the sys- tem ?—No doubt it might call it into activity. 284. In the case of a person of, say, 15 or 16 years of age, could syphilis have remained dor- mant all that time and then be caused by vacci- nation, if vaccination did not inoculate it ?— I have never seen any cases of that kind. 285. How soon should you consider the danger Avas over of the syphilis that was dormant ap- pearing ?—After the age of puberty. It would depend upon Avhcther the patient was suffering from his own indiscretion or Avhether it Avas con- stitutional. 286. Hoav late in life could hereditary syphilis appear that was dormant in the system from birth ?—Hereditary syphilis generally makes its appearance in the future offspring after marriage; we get at facts that Avere concealed before. In the father himself no suspicion has ewer been ex- cited as to any syphilitic taint until his children have exhibited the symptoms, and undoubtedly have it by constitutionaljhereditary transmission. 287. Then I understand you to say that it may pass OArer a generation and then reappear?—Un- doubtedly, 1 have seen syjfiiilis Avhere I could find no trace in the parents, but I have found upon inquiry that the grandfather and grand- mother had suffered in some Avay, or that there had been some constitutional taint in the previous generation. 288. Do you knoAv that it is a general opinion among medical men that the lymph cannot con- vey any other disease ?—That is the general im- pression, but I have seen syphilis conveyed through the vaccine virus. 289. But you stated just noAv, I think, that hereditary syphilis deyelopes itself in almost every case in three weeks after birth?—No, I say that if you vaccinate a child and com'ey through the vaccine virus any syphilitic taint it makes its ap- pearance in the third week. 290. If the syphilis Avas dormant in the system at birth, I thought you said it made its appear- ance generally a Aery short time after the birth? —Yes, a Aveek or tAvo. 291. And generally speaking, if it does not make its appearance a week or tAvo after birth the person may be considered safe for life, is that so ?—I did not say that. 292. If it must develope itself in three weeks, is not that so?—I did not say that it must deve- lope itself. 293. You stated that syphilis was frequently dormant in the system of the child, that is to say, hereditary syphilis and not that from inoculation ; Iioav soon after birth does that hereditary taint generally sIioav itself?—In the first Aveek. 294. If it did not sIioav itself in that first week might you consider the child safe from hereditary syphilis?—That Avould depend entirely upon cir- cumstances ; if the child is well nourished and Avell fed, and Avell attended to, in all probability the disease Avould lay dormant a considerable time. 295. How soon Avould you consider that if the symptoms did not appear the child would be safe from hereditary syphilis ?—If the taint is already in the system it Avill be a question entirely of circumstances as to Avhen it Avould develope itself. The result of my exjierience is, that in children born of syphilitic parents we see the disease shoAv itself in the first week or tAvo. 296. Does your experience lead you to knoAv Iioav soon you might pronounce a child safe from hereditary syphilis if the symptoms did not ap- pear ?—I am not aAvare of there being any given period. I said that in the ordinary Avay in children born of syphilitic parents it sIioavs itself in the first Aveek or tAvo. 297. What are the exceptions to that?—It may remain dormant, for anything I knoAv, for any number of years; but, in a general Avay, it sIioavs itself in the first Aveek or tAvo. 298. But you consider that it may remain dor- mant for any number of years, and for the Avhole of life, in fact ?—I do not say that. 299. But you said, just iioaa', that it might appear in the grandchildren ? —We knoAv that many persons inherit it from their ancestors after one or tAvo generations. It does occasionally skip a generation. 300. Is it your opinion that it might occasion- ally skip a generation?—No doubt. 301. Then it might remain dormant durino- the whole of life ?—Yes. 302. You stated, with regard to infant morta- lity, that it had increased since vaccination; upon Avhat do you base that opinion?—First, upon the Registrar General’s return, that 45 to 50 per cent, of the children die before they attain their fifth year. 303. In what particular place is that ?—In Liverpool, I think, and in most of the large tOAvns. 304. Is that per-centage larger or smaller than it formerly Avas?—Larger, I think. 305. Mr. Candlish.] bias infant mortality in- creased since vaccination ?—I think so. I simply state Avhat has been over and over again printed by the Registrar General. 306. You simply say that infant mortality is now large ?—No doubt, up to the age of five. 307. Are you in a condition to say Avhat it Avas before vaccination Avas practised ?—No, I have not studied that. 308. Then you would hesitate to say that any increased infant mortality is due to vaccination ? —I think that the mortality of infants is consi- derably increased by the poisonous influence of vaccination. That is my impression from watcli- ing the progress of the disease. 309. But you have no knoAvledge of the con- ditions of infant life before A accination Avas prac- tised?—I have not. 310. Then you are not in a condition to draw any inference, since you cannot compare the tAvo periods ?—No. 311. You say that the infant mortality is from 45 to 50 per cent, of the total deaths in large tOAvns; I happen to know that you are correct Avith regard to the toAvn Avith Avhich I am con- nected, but Avhat is it in the country ?—I do not knoAv at all ; I am not acquainted Avith any sta- tistics. 312. Whether it be 45 or 50 per cent, in the country or not, you cannot tell ?—I cannot. 313. Would you not require that fact to enable you to draAv general conclusions?—Yes, certainly it would be very interesting to knoAv Avhat the mortality is in the provinces. 314. May](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b24975424_0040.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
