Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

The Pamphlet Collection of Sir Robert Stout: Volume 40

Sir Thomas Chambers

Sir Thomas Chambers.

The Chairman thanked the disputants for the ability and courtesy they had shown, and proceeded to "sum up," as he saw by the programme he was expected to do. He did not think that he could do better than repeat what he said in the House of Commons. And first he would say that compulsory vaccination is beyond all comparison the strongest form of "parental government" that was ever introduced into this country. It overrides and tramples down parental authority in relation to children. It takes them out of the care of the father and mother, who are ordained by Providence to exercise their parental care, and it insists upon a disease being infused into the blood of every child in order to prevent the contingency of its catching another disease. That might be justifiable; but it could only be justifiable, not upon medical theories, not upon the observance of innumerable pre- page 29 cautions and the presence of favourable circumstances, but upon a truth undeniable, universal in its operation, certain in its results, free from peril, and an absolute preventive. (Cheers.) So far he was satisfied that Dr. Wyld would agree with him, because every word that had been uttered in the discussion that night proved that vaccination was a medical theory which had varied in its form, varied in the exposition of it by those who understood it best, varied in the estimate formed of its value, varied in the mode in which it was supposed to act, and varied in the manner of its operation from the peril of introducing other diseases; thus the theory and practice of vaccination had changed from time to time since Dr. Seaton's report in 1869, as Dr. Wyld had just stated. (Cheers.) The men appointed by Government to report upon the subject laid their report before Parliament, and it was printed by authority of the Queen, and yet that report was now declared by Dr. Wyld to be utterly worthless. (Cheers.) Dr. Wyld asserted that Dr. Seaton was wrong, and it was possible that Dr. Seaton would say that Dr. Wyld was wrong when he undertook to vaccinate 150 children with his calf lymph without a failure. (Cheers and laughter.) He must ask Dr. Wyld to excuse him for not believing it, because every doctor in every period had always been just as confident. (Laughter.) He once said to an eminent medical friend, "How many people did you kill by bleeding?" He said "I cannot tell, but a very great many." On the Continent bleeding was still practised, and at one time in England, and that not very distant, bleeding was done at every barber's shop, and it was believed by medical men that bleeding in the spring and fall was the only way to save a man's life. He believed that Count Cavour and the late King of Italy were bled to death. Well, bleeding was abandoned by medical men in England; and medicine, like all other arts, was an improving one. What Dr. Wyld, or any other doctor would believe twelve months hence it was impossible to conjecture. Now, it could not be set down as an established and immovable truth in medicine that vaccination was an absolute protection against the disease for which it was enforced. He spoke as one who had had small-pox naturally, and he had a stamped receipt from nature (a laugh); and therefore he would be in favour of anything which could prevent that, provided it did not do a greater mischief. He had the highest admiration and regard for medical men, who he thought did more good gratuitously than any other page 30 body of men (hear), but he did not like their system. They denied for a long time, even the most eminent of them, that it was possible under any circumstance for vaccination to convey syphilis. Now they all admit it. (Hear.) These things might not justify us in saying "we won't vaccinate;" but they do justify us in saying that it is cruel and unjust to enforce it. (Cheers.) He stated in the House of Commons that it was generally admitted that vaccination diminishes the number of deaths from small-pox, but it does not diminish the general mortality. (Hear.) Some persons said that this distinction might be worthy of a lawyer, but they could not understand it—as if altering the form of dying was the same thing as diminishing the number of deaths—as if there was not the greatest distinction in the world between altering the death from which people die and diminishing the whole number of deaths in the year. (Cheers.) He did not think that vaccination had diminished mortality or that any epidemic of small-pox was ever arrested by it. (Hear.) Then he wanted to know why in this country, as small-pox went down, consumption and fever rose. (Hear.) It was for medical men to account for this. There was every reason why consumption should diminish, and yet it increased. Our food was more wholesome, the air of our dwellings was better, sanitary conditions had been improved, and there was every condition of better health in the community; and yet consumption went on increasing. This was a reproach upon our medical system, and he wanted the doctors to consent to look into the causes, and not to sneer at a suggestion because it did not come from a medical man. If the statistics quoted that night about the increase of consumption and erysipelas were true, and if the doctors would kindly look into the thing, they might alter their mind, as they did about the possibility of communicating syphilis. But it was not right that Acts of Parliament should continue upon the statute-book imposing cumulative penalties upon a theory which changed its form every year, and upon authorities who changed their language every year. (Cheers.) Discussion of this question would do good; it would elicit the truth; and they were obliged to gentlemen who came forward to enlighten the public upon the question. He did not agree with those who thought we had any reason to be much frightened about small-pox now. One argument used by the advocates of vaccination struck him with amazement. When he argued in the House of Commons that the penalties for non- page 31 vaccination were unduly severe, the answer was, "What right have you to allow your unvaccinated child to be a peril to the community?" thus actually ignoring the protective theory. Why, 95 per cent, of the people were reported to be protected by vaccination. His reply was, "Don't you believe your own theory?" (Loud cheers.) What harm can a healthy, unvaccinated babe possibly do to children believed to be protected? (Hear.) He could not understand how any one who had the smallest faith in vaccination could have any fear about the five per cent, of unvaccinated children. (Cheers.) These were the facts. He felt a great difficulty in relying upon statistics. As regarded the cost, he thought that probably two millions a-year was paid to the medical profession on account of vaccination (shame); and, so far as their labour was concerned, they earned the money; but they earned it throughout the country under circumstances of enormous disadvantage. When a medical man called to vaccinate a child in Belgravia, he said to the anxious mother, "Wait." Why wait? "Wait till I get a good case." But the parish doctor vaccinated by the score with any lymph that might be available. (Hear, hear, and cries of "Shame.") Well, these considerations were overwhelmingly conclusive to his mind, and there was no answer to them. If vaccination were a safe and harmless and certain thing, no doctor would be more afraid of harm from vaccination than from baptising. (Hear and laughter.)

A vote was then taken as for and against vaccination, and the Chairman decided that a very large majority of those present were against vaccination.

On the motion of Dr. Collins, seconded by Dr. Wyld (who expressed his astonishment to find his friend, the Chairman, such a pronounced anti-vaccinator), a hearty vote of thanks was accorded to Sir Thomas Chambers for the courtesy, impartiality, and ability with which he had presided.

The Chairman, in acknowledging the vote of thanks, said that if Dr. Wyld received one-tenth of the painful letters from agonised parents that he received, he would be excused for having put the doubtful points strongly. He had not, however, committed himself further than that cumulative penalties ought not to be maintained upon a medical theory. (Cheers.)

page break

Just Published, Price One Penny.

Vaccination in the Light of History.

by

Alexander Wheeler,

Darlington.

London: F. Pitman, 20 Paternoster Row, E.C.