The Common Nature of Epidemics, and their relation to climate and civilizationSmith, Southwood
History
The Common Nature of Epidemics, and their relation to climate and civilization
Smith, Southwood
Communicable diseases; Epidemics; Quarantine
“This report,” he says, “was written, as it strikes me, under
circumstances which entitle it to much consideration. This ship had been
officially pointed out to him (as the Medical Officer of Quarantine) as
being strongly suspected. The responsibility of his office was thus
brought fully before his eyes, and he had _then_ no motive for making a
false report of his inspection of the ‘Dygden’s’ master and crew,
because the epidemic had not at that period commenced. If he had
observed any reasonable grounds for suspicion, he had only to fall in
with the rumour, and recommend that none of the persons or susceptible
articles on board should be permitted to land. The conduct and
declarations, therefore, of Dr Hennen, as a responsible public officer,
under such circumstances, when, if he erred at all, it would probably be
on the side of _over caution_, I hold to be most material.”
Such is a fair specimen of the evidence adduced on this occasion to
establish a positive case of importation. It breaks down at every point.
There is complete failure in the proof that Yellow Fever existed on
board the ship; there is complete failure in the proof that there was
the slightest connection between the ship and any persons on shore; and
there is even failure in the proof that the individuals who are alleged
to have introduced the disease were really affected with a malady of the
same nature as the epidemic that subsequently prevailed.
The Judge Advocate thus states the conclusion at which he arrived after
a careful examination of the proceedings of the Commission:—
“I am of opinion that the evidence brought forward has totally failed to
prove that the late epidemic disease was introduced from any foreign
source, either by the Swedish ship ‘Dygden’ or by any other means; and I
am further of opinion that the late epidemic had its origin in
Gibraltar.”
Medical observers on the spot, not members of the Board, but who
carefully watched its proceedings, it is believed, without any
exception, arrived at the same conclusion. Thus Dr T. Smith sums up the
result of his examination of the subject in the following words:—
“That it was not imported I think every candid man will admit who has
deliberately weighed the evidence given on the subject before the Board
of Commissioners, and the facts I have stated. Every endeavour to
establish the importation doctrine has failed, and both the Colonial
Secretary, Sir George Murray, and Sir James McGrigor, Director-General
of the Army Medical Department, I have heard, are convinced there is not
the slightest ground for such a belief; but, on the contrary, that there
is every reason to suppose the disease owed its origin to causes within
the walls of the garrison.”
Several comments were made by those who paid attention to the subject at
the time, on the manner in which this investigation was conducted, which
appear to deserve notice.
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