On the same principle, if all compulsory vaccination is abolished and each person left free to adopt or refuse vaccination, as he sees fit--which is his positive legal right--a true test of the virtue and safety or uselessness and danger of general vaccination will soon be arrived at. And if it can be shown in such a large and free test that the unvaccinated part of the population or the unvaccinated part of the Army and Navy is no more liable, on the average, to catch smallpox or typhoid fever than the vaccinated part, and is entirely free from the grave dangers of vaccination itself, surely a great lesson in medical sanity and progress will be learned. As a matter of fact, this test has already proved in the case of the U. S. Army in France that typhoid vaccination is useless as a preventive where sanitation is grossly neglected. See pages 207 and 210. It has also proved in the case of poorly vaccinated but sanitary England and particularly in the unvaccinated and very sanitary City of Leicester, as compared with much vaccinated Japan, Germany and Berlin, that good sanitation, isolation and hygiene without vaccination give the best result in reducing and preventing smallpox in the population and also in greatly reducing the general death-rate and infant death-rate as compared to the same rates in the heavily vaccinated communities named. On this point see one of the latest medical works on this subject by a pro-vaccinator, “The Vaccination Question,” by Dr. Millard, London, 1914. Now, as medical freedom is absolutely necessary for true medical progress, as just shown, so it is equally necessary for medical truth and human safety. At this point I am sure it will be readily admitted that even if an alleged medical remedy were absolutely effective and sure, and absolutely safe, harmless, and beneficial, it would not be ethically or legally proper to force it upon any patient against free will and consent. But when an alleged remedy is very uncertain, doubtful or irregular in its action, or very dangerous and frequently fatal in its effects, such as vaccination has been proved to be, surely the forcing of such a doubtful and dangerous remedy on any person under pretense of its necessity and harmlessness is not only unethical but it is a question whether this is not also a gross act of sheer criminal malpractice.