ONE OR TWO PLAIN STATEMENTS AS TO SMALL-POX INOCULATION AND VACCINATION (1878)

ONE OR TWO

PLAIN STATEMENTS

AS TO

SMALL-POX

INOCULATION

AND

VACCINATION

IPSWICH 1878

There are numerous persons, laymen and professional, who have never studied the questions of Small—pox, Inoculation, and Vaccination, and who yet speak with great confidence as to those questions.

We are often told that vaccination is " stamping out" small-pox; and yet the inexorable logic of facts shows the contrary, not only in England but in other countries. In this country the figures of the Registrar-General show that, since vaccination was made compulsory by Act of Parliament, now 25 years ago, small-pox has increased enormously. This is shown plainly enough by the following figures compiled from the Government report, and which cannot be questioned by anybody :—

. Date Deaths from smallpox.
1st. 1857-58—59 ... 14,244
2nd. 1863-64-65 ... 20,059
3rd. 1870-71-72 ... ... 44,840

Increase of population from 1st to 2nd epidemic - - 7 per cent.
Increase of Small-pox in the same period, nearly - - - - 50 per cent
Increase of population from 2nd to 3rd epidemic - - 10 per cent.
Increase of Small-pox in the same period 120 per cent.
Deaths from Small-pox in the first 10 years after the enforcement of Vaccination—1854 to 1863 .. 33,515
In the second 10 years—1864 to 1873 70,458

There are no official returns published up to the present date, 1878; but leaving out the whole country (or provincial England), we may safely aver that during the past five years, in London alone, something between 5,000 and 10,000 people have died of small-pox; and London is reckoned the best vaccinated city in England—95 per cent. of all births being accounted for as "vaccinated," in accordance with the official report.

Some ignorantly talk of "inoculation," and say that the reason why the people were inoculated, in order to give them or to make them "take" small-pox, was because "everybody was almost sure to get it."

"In those days," that is, previous to inoculation, these uninformed persons say, "There were "99 chances to 1 that you would get small-pox. "Almost all were certain to get it and that is why "almost all were inoculated, so as to have it in a "mild form."

Nothing more preposterous or untrue was ever put forth as a proposition on which to base a fallacy. This "mild form" of disease is quackery, and nothing more nor less. But let us turn to recognized authorities as to the history of smallpox and inoculation.

The following, sufficient of itself, is only one out of many authorities which I could give. What does a well-known doctor say, a man highly respected, and whose words I quote. This M.D., born 100 years ago, says in his "standard" work:--

"Restrictions under the heaviest penalties ought to be enforced, too, upon the licentiousness of inoculation for the small-pox, by which the existence of the disease has been insured to such a degree, that it is scarcely to be doubted that more persons have died of the small-pox since the introduction of inoculation than before, it was known in England, because the infection has been perpetually kept up, and disseminated by this means at all limes; whereas, before inoculation was known, it was only occasionally endemic."—Commentaries on the Diseases of Children, by JOHN CLARK, M.D., LONDON, 1815.

NOTE :—That inoculation, according to this writer, caused more persons to die of small-pox than was ever before known in England ! here is a recognized medical authority Which says that, before inoculation was known, small-pox only occurred in certain places occasionally ; and this MD spoke the honest truth when he spoke of the wicked, vile practice of inoculation—a practice so much hated by the people of England, when first introduced, that four criminals condemned to be hanged in London had a "royal pardon," on condition of their submitting to be inoculated for the small-pox ; which they readily submitted to, and were—externally—none the worse.

The doctors at first cursed "inoculation"; afterwards, when it had obtained royal favour, they blessed it. Subsequently, when Jenner obtained royal favour with his " vaccination," the doctors then cursed inoculation, which they had previously blessed and the "immortal Jenner" having obtained only £10,000 for his "beneficent discovery," was strongly advised by his brother doctors to go in for £20,000 more, and a "grateful Parliament ‘‘gave Jenner this additional sum.

In Moore’s History of Small-Pox we are told that the people were so disgusted with inoculation, that they threatened to pull down the inoculation stations. I have also read—can give authority if necessary— of the inoculating doctors who were described by the vaccinators as "murderers‘‘; and the English statute law now says, small—pox inoculation is a penal offence punishable with severe penalties.

Thus much as to inoculation.

The first doctors in England now all admit (what they all denied a few years ago), that most frightful diseases may be, and are, constantly being conveyed to children by vaccination.

This being admittedly so, and admitted by all doctors of any name or influence, ought vaccination to be compulsory? Nay, is it not a disgrace to a so-called "free country" that a law which gives disease [not health, mind you!] should be a compulsory law ?

What do the doctors call "vaccine lymph"? It is called by all doctors "vaccine virus "; and the word virus is only a Latin word for poison ; there can, therefore, be no proper vaccination which does not convey vaccine virus.

Sir Thomas Watson, MD., a very eminent physician, writing in a monthly organ, of great influence, called The Nineteenth Century (June No.), says :—" I can readily sympathize with, and even applaud a father who is willing to suffer fines or " imprisonment over and over again rather than submit his child to the risk of an infection so "ghastly as may accompany vaccination." This utterance at the present moment ought to weigh with all thoughtful persons. It has already weighed with one constituency, which has returned to Parliament a man who avowed himself strongly and plainly an Anti—Compulsory Vaccinator ; and this gentleman, Mr. Otway, is returned for Rochester by a very handsome majority. That the Compulsory Vaccination laws are doomed to be repealed and buried in oblivion is a foregone conclusion.

No tyranny in politics can survive the scathing scorn which the love of liberty inspires. No man who calls himself a "Liberal,’’ and who "believes" blindly in the "criminality of perfect health," ought ever to legislate, but to be legislated for.

One word as to small-pox. That small-pox is contagious has never been proved. That one takes it, and that 20 or 100 do not take it, has often been shown. This applies to the vaccinated just as much as unvaccinated.

When small-pox is said to be epidemic, and downright bad in a town or city, about 30 in every 1,000 of the population get it; but 5, or say 6, out of every 1,000 die of small-pox; and these figures represent what would be termed a most dreadful and awfully terrible visitation of small-pox. Is it so terrible? "Death" is our normal finale or exit from this planet; and here is the remarkable fact— Whenever small-pox is epidemic in England, the general death-rate is not increased. This is a most important fact.

I know many persons who regard small-pox as being very far from a bane; in fact, who regard small-pox as an effort of nature to throw off impurities from the bodily system. Certain is it, as a matter of fact, that many have enjoyed stronger, sounder health after an attack of small-pox.

Dr. Pearce, of London, told me recently that he hadn’t an unsound tooth in his head; that he enjoyed excellent health; and that to the impurities cast off from his system by a severe attack of small-pox when young, he largely attributed his good health.

In a severe epidemic of small-pox at Harwich lately, the people mixed with each other at the vaccination stations by the hundred; and it has never been even suggested that they carried the infection in their clothes from their homes.

The deaths from small-pox were, during the late epidemic in Harwich, about 7 in every 1,000 of the population; and the "ignorant anti-vaccinator" is quite a rara avis in Harwich, never having yet settled there.

The Vaccination Register—best of evidence— showed Harwich to be a town the best "protected" against small-pox in all England!

Jenner received £30,000 because he said vaccination was an absolute protection against small-pox. He lived long enough to see that he had utterly deluded himself and the nation, but he didn’t return the money. Then it was said that vaccination would prevent death from small-pox; this was soon shown to be utterly wrong. Then it was said that vaccination would diminish the death-rate per 100 of those who took small-pox; this has been shown by physicians arid statisticians to be utterly wrong, too.

I am aware of the figures which are put forth, and which mislead the public. The vaccinated are simply written down un-vaccinated, and the thing is done; and the same individuals who figure in the Vaccination Register "Successfully vaccinated," figure in the Death Register "Unvaccinated."

In places where this singular "system" is not in vogue, the death-rate from small-pox shows as nearly as possible the same among the vaccinated as among the unvaccinated. There is no country where vaccination is practised where small-pox is "stamped out"; on the contrary, the best vaccinated countries, is Sweden and Prussia, have suffered the most severely from small-pox, while the worst vaccinated country, viz., Spain, has suffered least of all.

These plain statements of facts ought to make us ask one question: Has the State any right whatever to compel every speechless innocent to have this lymph put into its system?

The medical profession are unanimous as to the virtue of lymph wearing away, and that revaccination is the only "protection." If this be so, then re-vaccination ought to be compulsory, or there should be no compulsion at all.

The thousands upon thousands of cases of smallpox among soldiers all re-vaccinated—the armies of Europe—prove that re-vaccination, too, is a delusion.

It is the boast of civilization, as against savage life, that the weak are protected by the strong; but in the matter of vaccination the strong can please themselves, while the weak, the helpless, and speechless are the subjects of severe and stringent compulsory law; and all the while there is the greatest division among medical men as to what is, and what is riot, "proper vaccination": the Government recommending one kind of "pure lymph," doctors of great eminence denouncing it; and still in "free England" we sit, like Patience on a monument, and wear the fetters of Compulsory Vaccination.

JAMES LEWIS.