The Story of a Great Delusion in a Series of Matter-of-Fact ChaptersWhite, William
History
The Story of a Great Delusion in a Series of Matter-of-Fact Chapters
White, William
Vaccination
The resistance to Vaccination was almost entirely confined to
the resistance of inoculators, who were too deeply compromised
by their own disloyalty to Nature, to make effective resistance.
They were steadily borne down by the vaccinators, many of whom
had been energetic inoculators, and displayed the usual ardour of
apostates in condemning what they had formerly approved. Indeed,
when we consider how Inoculation was commended for its efficiency
and harmlessness by the same medical authorities who, within a year
or two after Jenner’s appearance, denounced the practice for its
difficulties and dangers, their tergiversation appears little short
of shameless. Dr. Lettsom had been an inoculator, yet on 2nd July,
1805, he felt warranted in writing--
What have not the abettors of Variolous Inoculation to answer
for? To shoot a dozen or two innocent people in the public
streets of London would not be half so injurious as allowing
the murderers to kill the rising generation, the future hope of
the State. Nothing can show the supineness and ignorance of the
Government more than legalising these Variolous Murders.
How far the conquest of the inoculators by the vaccinators had
advanced, appeared in a debate in the House of Commons in 1806,
when Wilberforce urged that Inoculation should be suppressed, or at
least that those who insisted on Inoculation should be compelled
to place their patients in quarantine. Mr. Windham admitted the
scandal of wretched and miserable subjects of Inoculation being
carried about in the streets, but he hesitated to recommend
coercive legislation until persuasion had been fully tried and
had failed. Dr. Matthews, M.P. for Hereford, took occasion at the
same time to run with the hounds. Inoculation, he said, was a
frequent cause of disfigurement and of death in its most awful
form; it was a magazine of the most dreadful evils; a magnifier of
mortality; and a means of introducing scrofula, a more dangerous
and pernicious disorder than smallpox itself--facts which it would
have been more creditable to have proclaimed when Inoculation was
in fashion. It is so easy to kick when a foe has fallen, and where
all are kicking. Human nature is never so despicable as when thus
engaged.
The question of restraining Inoculation came again before the House
of Commons in 1807, when the practice of inoculating out-patients
at the London dispensaries and hospitals was energetically
condemned. “I think that the legislature,” said Mr. Sturges Bourne,
“would be as much justified in taking a measure to prevent this
evil by restraint, as a man would be in snatching a fire-brand out
of the hands of a maniac just as he was going to set fire to a
city.”
No one was more eager to suppress Inoculation by force than Jenner
himself, and in July 1807, he sought an interview with the Premier
for the purpose. In a letter to Dr. Lettsom he thus describes his
mortification--
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