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
Catalogue details

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.

    45/558 (page 21)
    you have any infringement of the laws of nature as to sanitary matters, then you have more small- pox. 390. But, as a matter of fact, does it not occur much more among the neglected and poorer classes?—It is a curious fact that you always find small-pox as an endemic in badly ventilated and badly drained houses, such as the back slums and fever dens that you read of in London. 391. When it appears as epidemic, upon what classes of society does it fall ?—Those living in a filthy and dirty state, and who do not pay atten- tion to sanitary laws ; living, for instance, five or six in a room that is not capable of supporting life for more than an hour or two. 392. Then would you consider that favourable sanitary conditions would do far more to remove small-pox than vaccination ?—Decidedly, and the more you can carry out arrangements of that kind, the sooner you will diminish the present epidemic. 393. Does small-pox attack the young more than those who are less young ?—It attacks the young, especially infants ; and it is more fatal to them. 394. Does the liability to the disease diminish every year that you get older, whether you are vaccinated or unvaccinated ?—No doubt; for instance, I could not successfully re-vaccinate many persons after puberty, but during an epidemic 1 could vaccinate them any number of times. 395. As a matter of fact, the figures show that you are less liable as you get older, whether you are vaccinated or not?—Yes. 396. How long did the system of inoculation prevail in this country ?—For about 70 years. 397. Was it generally recommended by the profession ?—It was highly approved of by the College of Physicians. 398. For how long?—Of course it met with a great deal of opposition at its first introduction ; but after a series of experiments, many persons who took a very leading part at that time, would not believe that you could have small-pox a second time ; everybody, in fact, thought so ; and in the early part of my professional career, I had the opportunity of witnessing a great many cases ot inoculation, and I have inoculated people myself also, before it was made a penal offence ; but it was very generally adopted, because the profes- sion believed that you could not have the small- pox a second time, and the public believed that you could not have the small-pox a second time. 399. It seems remarkable, that the medical profession generally adopted it; do you know on what basis of experience it was supposed to rest, and why the profession adopted it ?—There is a great deal of fashion in medicine, and if you can get half-a-dozen fashionable men to recommend anything, it goes down ; in the same way with medicines now-a-days; the hydrochlorate and hydrate of potassium, and those things, became fashionable; so with inoculation, many persons had an idea that it gave them more vigour and prevented any disfigurement, and consequently it was generally adopted. 400. Did you say that Dr. Jenner was in the habit of inoculating with grease from horses’ heels ?—In the original work, he tells you that the true vaccine could never be obtained, except through the greasy horse. He said, “ Thus the disease makes its progress from the horse to the nipple of the cow, and from the cow to the human 0.37. subject.” He goes on further, and he gives an instance, and a drawing also of a case. 401. Where do we get what is called the vaccine matter now ?—I believe it is generally understood to be obtained from the inoculation suggested by Mr. Seely, by first giving the cow the small-pox. That is the general impression, but of course I cannot say positively how it is now obtained. That was the original source, and I be- lieve that was abandoned, and they got what they call a fresh supply, by inoculating the cow with small-pox, and when you get the true Jennerian vesicle, as it is termed, this is the lymph which is made use of. 402. Are you aware that the practice of in- oculating cows now takes place anywhere ?—I tried the experiment with a view of getting what they call pure lymph from the cow. 403. Where do they get the small-pox ?—They use the small-pox virus. 404. The human small-pox ? — The human small-pox. It is supposed to mitigate the virulence of the complaint. 405. Is that an acknowledged fact?—Yes, I believe so. I have read up a good deal of these matters a few years ago. 406- Who is engaged in preparing this vaccine matter?—It is a Government affair. When I have been short of pure lymph (so called), I have always applied to the National Vaccine Institu- tion for a fresh supply. 407. Do I understand you aright, that children are now vaccinated from the arms of other children, or direct from the cow ?—I have aban- doned the practice for the last 10 or 12 years; therefore I do not know what they are doing now. 408. I have been asked to put this question to you ; did you give a certificate to the Rev. H. J. Allen, that his children were not in a fit state for vaccination? — Yes; his children were brought to me; they were covered with a nasty cutaneous eruption. The mother died in the last stage of consumption, and they were the very worst subjects for vaccination, and 1 thought it just possible that if I introduced any vaccine, they would, in all probability, be very con- siderably debilitated. This dissenting minister came from a long way, and wanted to know whether it would be convenient for me to see the children; I forget how many, but I think four or five. I never remembered to have seen such strumous-looking subjects. 409. You gave him this certificate not because you objected to vaccination, but because they were bad subjects?—Certainly; they were the very worst subjects for vaccination. 410. Being a duly qualified medical prac- titioner, did you expect that your certificate would be rejected?—Certainly not. 411. Was it accepted or rejected?—It was rejected. 412. By whom, and whea?—I think by the Duke of Manchester; but I was not present when the examination took place. 413. And Mr. Allen was convicted of an offence for not having his children vaccinated, notwithstanding your certificate, was he not?— Yes. 414. For what reason?—I learned afterwards, that they objected to my certificate because I was opposed to vaccination generally. 415. Mr. Muntz.'] You made some remark just now as to taking the vaccine matter from c 3 the Mr. W.J. Collins, M.D. 3 March 1871.