On Tuesday evening, 28th May, 1878, a Discussion on the question, "Is Vaccination worthy of National Support?" took place in South Place Chapel, Finsbury, London. The Right Hon. Sir Thomas Chambers, M.P., Recorder of the City of London, pre-sided; and Dr. George Wyld, of Great Cumberland Place, Hyde Park, supported the affirmative; whilst Mr. Alexander Wheeler, a member of the Society of Friends, of Darlington, maintained the negative. Amongst the audience, and on the platform, were observed many prominent Anti-Vaccinators from various parts of the kingdom, including Mr. William Tebb, of London, the originator of the discussion; Dr. Collins; Dr. Pearce; Dr. Haughton; Dr. T. L. Nichols; Dr. Pratt, of Durham; Dr. Pearce, of Sunderland; Mr. Thos. Baker, barrister; Col. Clinton, of Royston; Mr. Charles Gillett, of Banbury; Alderman Rees, J. P., of Dover; Mr. Lucas, of Brighton; Mr. Lewis, of Ipswich; Mr. Thurlow, of Sudbury; Mr. Martin, of Lewes; Mr. Henry Pitman; Mr. William Young, Mr. William White, and Miss Chandos Leigh Hunt.

The Chairman, in his opening remarks, expressed the pleasure which it gave him to preside, although he did so at some inconvenience. The subject for discussion was a very important one, and it had been frequently discussed in Parliament. It touched the public health, for there had been serious epidemics of smallpox. He would not go into the question; it had two sides. The occurrence of small-pox after vaccination required to be accounted for. There were strong temptations to say that those who died were either unvaccinated or imperfectly vaccinated. To say that a person who died of small-pox after vaccination was "imperfectly vaccinated," was to give up the argument, or to suppose that the listener was ignorant of the subject. These discrepancies in the evidence required to be explained. Hence the value of such discussions in enlightening the public mind. Mr. Wheeler he met for the first time; Dr. Wyld he had known for many years. page 4 He had no doubt that both sides would be represented with ability and fairness, and that the auditors would listen with calmness even to statements from which they might dissent.