In support of so extraordinary a fact, I shall lay before my
reader a great number of instances. [Footnote: It is necessary to
observe that pustulous sores frequently appear spontaneously on
the nipples of cows, and instances have occurred, though very
rarely, of the hands of the servants employed in milking being
affected with sores in consequence, and even of their feeling an
indisposition from absorption. These pustules arc of a much
milder nature than those which arise from that contagion which
constitutes the true cow-pox. They are always free from the
bluish or livid tint so conspicuous in the pustules in that
disease. No erysipelas attends them, nor do they shew any
phagedenic disposition as in the other case, but quickly
terminate in a scab without creating any apparent disorder in the
cow. This complaint appears at various seasons of the year, but
most commonly in the spring, when the cows are first taken from
their winter food and fed with grass. It is very apt to appear
also when they are suckling their young. But this disease is not
to be considered as similar in any respect to that of which I am
treating, as it is incapable of producing any specific effects on
the human constitution. However, it is of the greatest
consequence to point it out here, lest the want of discrimination
should occasion an idea of security from the infection of the
smallpox, which might prove delusive.]
CASE I.--Joseph Merret, now an under gardener to the Earl of
Berkeley, lived as a servant with a farmer near this place in the
year 1770, and occasionally assisted in milking his master's
cows. Several horses belonging to the farm began to have sore
heels, which Merret frequently attended. The cows soon became
affected with the cow-pox, and soon after several sores appeared
on his hands. Swellings and stiffness in each axilla followed,
and he was so much indisposed for several days as to be incapable
of pursuing his ordinary employment. Previously to the appearance
of the distemper among the cows there was no fresh cow brought
into the farm, nor any servant employed who was affected with the
cow-pox.
In April, 1795, a general inoculation taking place here, Merret
was inoculated with his family; so that a period of twenty-five
years had elapsed from his having the cow-pox to this time.
However, though the variolous matter was repeatedly inserted into
his arm, I found it impracticable to infect him with it; an
efflorescence only, taking on an erysipelatous look about the
centre, appearing on the skin near the punctured parts. During
the whole time that his family had the smallpox, one of whom had
it very full, he remained in the house with them, but received no
injury from exposure to the contagion.
It is necessary to observe that the utmost care was taken to
ascertain, with the most scrupulous precision, that no one whose
case is here adduced had gone through the smallpox previous to
these attempts to produce that disease.
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