Copy 1

An answer to Dr. Moseley, containing a defence of vaccination / By John Ring.

  • John Ring
Date:
1805
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: An answer to Dr. Moseley, containing a defence of vaccination / By John Ring. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    20/316 page 8
    dead body, and used for inoculation with: the same success, as ifit had been taken from a living subject, and the mildest disease. Prudence, how- ever, has never yet made such an experiment, and never will. Neither will prudence ever publish an account of such rash and unwarrantable experiments, without branding them ve the _ stigma they deserve, ? To do the learned author justice, he allows that matter should never be taken from a body in a state of putrefaction ; otherwise it may produce all the evils that ensue on the insertion of putrid matter, ‘The very thought of such evils is, in- deed, enough to harrow up the soul; and call to mind the ever-honoured and ever-mournful names of Walsh and Peckwell. If, therefore, the disciples of Dr. Moseley take matter from a dead body, in order to inoculate for the small- pox, let prudence guide their hands; let them not transgress the rule of their master, by taking matter from a body that 1s in a state of putte- faction. Dr. Moseley maintains, that no other disease can be conveyed into the habit with the small- pox. In this point medical practitioners agree with him. He then gives a list of diseases; and says, no person ought to take matter for inocula- tion from any subject who labours under them, even if prejudice were out of the question; al- 4
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3