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.

    53/558 (page 29)
    what I remember, that I had not registered the full complement of terms; that is to say, that I had not registered my lectures. 584. You have referred to the opinion of Dr. Startin, in which he says, that vaccine may be the means of conveying disease; is that an ex- pression of opinion, or is it the knowledge of a fact, and does he state that it has conveyed it?— I think he states that, he believes that the true J.ennerian vesicle in a subject suffering from con- stitutionally acquired syphilis may be the means of transmitting this disease. 585. He is of opinion that it may be, but has he stated that it ever has done so?—I only quote what he states himself. 586. You have given a statement as to the direful effects of vaccination as occurring at the camp of Shorncliffe; you have not given that on your own authority, but as an extract; have you given a reference to the authority from which you got it ?—I think not. 587. Is it usual for men of eminence or care to give statements of that kind without giving the authority ?—It is a generally acknowledged fact, and I think you will have evidence brought before you to prove that such has been the case. 588. Is it usual in a published work by men of eminence to give a statement of a fact, on the authority of another, without giving a reference to the authority, or is it justifiable?—I decline to answer that question. 589. Mr. IF. H. Smith I] You have prepared yourself for examination on this question of small-pox ; I apprehend that you were aware that you were about to be examined here?— Yes; 1 wrote to say so. 590. Have you inquired into the operation of the small-pox hospital at Hampstead, which has been opened during the last three months for the pauper patients of London ?—I have seen the report. 591. Have you been there yourself?—I have not. 592. Are you aware that none of the nurses or attendants have been attacked by small-pox ? —I am not aware of it, because I have not visited the place. 593. But you have no reason to doubt the official statements which have been made to that effect ?—None. 594. You say that re-vaccination deteriorates the system and weakens the powers of vitality ? —I do. 595. Then, I presume, that those nurses having been vaccinated are more liable to the disease than persons who have not been vac- cinated ?—It does not act upon every one in the same way ; if you take a selection of strong healthy people they shake it off. 596. In your evidence you have stated that in at least one-third of the cases, injury has resulted from vaccination ?—I have. 597. Therefore, in one-third of the cases of persons taken promiscuously as nurses in the hospital, I presume injury has resulted ?—There is a very careful selection made of them. 598. Are you prepared to assert that there is a very careful selection of healthy persons; are you not aware that there is great difficulty in obtaining nurses for small-pox hospitals?—Very great. 599. Then is there the power of obtaining very healthy persons ?—Not just now. 600. Then they should be more liable to small- 0.37. pox, because they have been recently vaccinated ? —I did not say that. 601. But your evidence says so?—My evidence was, that by vaccination you deteriorate and weaken the powers of vitality. 602. And being placed in a vitiated atmosphere of small-pox, they would, therefore, be more liable to the effects of small-pox than they would otherwise have been ?—I do not say that. 603. Are you aware that in the official reports the per centage of deaths, in vaccinated cases, is stated to have been only seven per cent, in the hospital at Hampstead, out of a number of 800 patients admitted within the last three months, and that the unvaccinated patients have died in the proportion of 43 per cent.?—Yes, I believe that is quite correct. 604. Are you aware also, that the medical officer reports, that where the small-pox has been fatal in vaccinated cases, there has been some previous visitation of the system, and that in the majority of cases the visitation is caused by gin-drinking to excess ?—I have no reason to doubt it. 605. Chairman.] At Question 193, I asked you this: “ I suppose we are to understand that you consider vaccination not only useless, but an evil; are we to understand that you believe that it has been instrumental in increasing infant mor- tality?” To that, your answer is, £i No doubt about it; especially when we take into considera- tion that the infant mortality, since vaccination in large towns, is as much as from 45 to 50 per cent, before they attain their fifth year what do you mean by “from 45 to 50 per cent”?— That amongst the children up to the age of five, from 45 to 50 per cent, are reported as having died. 606. Where did you obtain that fact ?—It is a well known fact, and one that has been often quoted; I think that Sir James Simpson quotes it, but I am unable now to give it you; it was selected, I believe, from the Registrar General’s Report, but 1 will not be certain. 607. I have the Registrar General’s Report before me, and I find that the average annual rate of mortality from different causes during the 10 years from 1851 to 1860, in the case of infants under five years of age, is in the best dis- tricts, instead of 45 percent., three and one-third per cent., in England and Wales generally six and three-quarters per cent., in the metropolis seven and four-fifths per cent., and in Liverpool, which is much the highest of any, thirteen and one-fifth per cent.; were you aware that that was the result of the inquiries of the Registrar General for the 10 years from 1851 to 1860 ?—I was not aware of that certainly. 608. Then what made you say, as you have said in the course of your evidence, that you obtained this statement of from 45 to 50 per cent, froni the returns of the Registrar General ? —It h as been published over and over again. 609. But where? — Through the usual me- diums. 610. Can yrou give us the publication?—I have not it by me, but I can do so. 611. Do you not imagine that you must be under a mistake when you find that what I have read is the return of the Registrar General ?— Yes, that is the return (and, of course, I have no reason to doubt it), but what I have always been led to believe, and what I have always seen re- ported from time to time, is that there is a mor- D 3 tality Mr. W.J.Collins, M.D. 3 March 1871.