Horrors of vaccination exposed and illustrated: $b Petition to the President to abolish compulsory vaccination in Army and NavyHiggins, Chas. M. (Charles Michael)
History
Horrors of vaccination exposed and illustrated: $b Petition to the President to abolish compulsory vaccination in Army and Navy
Higgins, Chas. M. (Charles Michael)
Vaccination
“I charge you, gentlemen of the jury, that the courts of this
State in construing the authority and power so conferred upon
local health officers who are the executive members of the
board or the local boards, have held that there is no warrant
or authority in law for the compulsory vaccination of any
individual.”
At the second trial of this case in February, 1910, Judge LeBœuf
charged the jury in these words:
“Now, I have charged you that this assault which is claimed to
have existed here, due to the forcible vaccination, if it was
a forcible vaccination, that is, if it was against this man’s
will, is one which you must consider. And the reason of that is
this: This man, in the eyes of the law, just as you and I and
all of us in this court-room, has the right to be let alone.
We all have the right to the freedom of our persons and that
freedom of our persons may not be unlawfully invaded. That is a
great right. It is one of the most important rights we have.”
THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ON THE PREËMINENT RIGHTS OF THE
INDIVIDUAL
In conclusion on this most vital point, let me call your special
attention, Mr. President, to a most significant and important decision
of the U. S. Supreme Court in the vaccination case of Jacobson _v._
Massachusetts, rendered in 1905, on appeal from the Supreme Court of
Massachusetts. In this long and interesting decision, one of its most
clear and conclusive paragraphs emphatically declares the preëminent
rights of the individual in certain spheres, as follows:
“There is, of course, a sphere within which the individual may
assert the supremacy of his own will and rightfully dispute
the authority of any human government, especially of any free
government existing under a written constitution, to interfere
with the exercise of that will.”
Now, what is this “sphere” within which this highest court
in our land tells us so clearly and emphatically that “_the individual
may assert the supremacy of his own will and rightfully dispute the
authority of any human government, especially of any free government,
existing under a written constitution, to interfere with the exercise
of that will_”?
The context both before and after this paragraph shows clearly that
this “sphere” of individual right and freedom exists wherever any
unalienable or inherent natural right secured by our constitution is
invaded or violated, or where any act or practice forced upon the
individual is potentially or actually dangerous to the health or life
of that individual, such as I have shown every act of vaccination to
be, in its very nature being an act of septicemic infection or blood
poisoning pure and simple, which sometimes causes wide-spread epidemics
and frequently causes serious injuries and many deaths, even more
deaths than smallpox itself, as has been demonstrated beyond question.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account