ever from sitting for his county during the present Parliament-if the Judge had not been a common-sense man like Baron Dowse, but had been as malignant as Judge Keogh, or as great a purist as Judge Lawson, he would, under a Bill like this, have disqualified him for ever from sitting for the county again. He (Mr. Callan) would rather take a plank bed for 14 years than be deprived for ever from sitting for his constituency, though under this Act, if they indulged in the smallest treating of electors without any guilty intention, they would be liable to be disqualified for MADAGASCAR-CAPTURE OF TAMA TAVE BY THE FRENCH. SIR R. ASSHETON CROSS: I wish to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether the report contained in the evening papers is true, which states that the French Admiral at Madagascar has taken Tamatave, has settled himself there, and has taken the Custom House, and also established himself firmly in those parts? LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: I cannot, of course, say whether the report is true; but I made it my duty to inquire this evening, and up to half past 6 no information had been received at the Foreign Office. The House suspended its Sitting at Seven of the clock. MOTIONS. VACCINATION.-RESOLUTION. attention to the Laws relating to VacciMR. P. A. TAYLOR, in rising to call nation; and to move inexpedient and unjust to enforce Vaccination under penalties upon those who regard it as inadvisable and dangerous," said: Mr. Speaker, I think it is likely that there are many hon. Members who regard the question that I am about to bring before the House as a somewhat as having no right to take up a portion unimportant one, and who look upon me of the time of the House for its consideration in a Session that stands "That, in the opinion of this House, it is marked by the great block in its Business and the great difficulty of progression. I hope to be able to show that this is not entirely true, and that I hold a very different opinion. In my opinion, hardly a more important question could possibly come before the House of Commons than that upon which I have now to ask their attention. Whether we regard the question as a question of individual right against medical tyranny, or whether we regard it as a question of national health-because now it can no longer be denied that there is the possibility of the accumulated corruptions of our ancestors being transmitted to the coming generation-or whether I point to the view of the extreme sufferprotestors against the law are now sufing and wrong under which individual fering, or to the view of the question taken by the statesmen of the past period, or by the statesmen of the present period, its importance cannot be denied. George Canning and Sir Robert Peel declared, 40, or 50, or 60 years ago, in almost identical words, that whatof vaccination, nothing should induce ever might be the opinion of the value them to make it compulsory, being a thing so entirely contrary to the spirit of British liberty and British privilege. Also, our own Premier gave utterance to these words "I regard compulsory and penal provisions, such as those of the Vaccination Acts, with mistrust and misgiving; and, were I engaged on an inquiry, I should require very clear proof of their necessity before giving them my The House resumed its Sitting at approval." Nine of the clock. It is quite clear, therefore, from the statements of these statesmen, that the | close ratio to the number of Members question is one of very considerable na- who have thought it worth while to tional importance; and if I could con- study this question for themselves. That vince the right hon. Gentleman the has been my experience. I sat on the Prime Minister-I am sorry I have not Select Committee of 1871 upon these the honour of seeing him here at this laws, and I entered that Committee with moment [Mr. WARTON: Hear, hear!] that traditionary conviction that 99 men -if I could impress upon him the out of 100 still have, that it was a matteramount of persecution going on through- of-course, and that nothing could be said. out the country in consequence of the against it. I signed that Report which infliction of these laws; if I could point defended the excellence of vaccination out to him the number of persons who and its safety. I did, not, however, supare suffering under fines and imprison- port the right of compulsion, and I subment for conscience sake; and if I could mitted a clause to the Committee which bring before his mind the hundreds and would have removed the difficulties of thousands of children who are suffering the case. I merely suggested that anydisease and death as a consequence of body should be free from the necessity this system, I think I should have grounds of vaccinating his family who would sign for inducing him to make that inquiry a declaration that he had a conscientious of which he spoke in those words. I objection to it; and in answer to a sugmight point to another matter, although gestion that there were many who had no it is an entirely inferior one; and that is real objection to it, and only fell foul of the lawless spirit of evasion which is it from apathy, I replied that a small quite sure to spring up in a community fine in the form of a stamp should be where a wrong and tyranny is done. I appended to the declaration. Had that can tell him of fathers who neglect to been done, the subsequent difficulties register the births of their children, in that have arisen would never have ocorder to attempt to escape the infliction curred. But the House will see that, of this law. I can tell him where pa- having committed myself to sign that rents flit about from one part of the Report, it became a matter of concountry to another, in order, if possible, science with me. I had done my little to avoid the surgeons and the police. best to endorse and to maintain the The late President of the Local Govern- opinion of the excellence of vaccination. ment Board (Mr. Dodson), when ap- I was led by my political objection to pealed to by my hon. and learned this compulsion to look more and more Friend the Member for Stockport (Mr. into the medical and scientific side of Hopwood), as to whether, in cases where the question; and I was brought to the children had died from the infliction of conclusion that not only was there some vaccination, there would not be a just evidence against vaccination, but that appeal to the magistrate for mercy and there was nothing whatever to be said consideration, said with commendable in its favour-that it was an absolute kindness that although it would not, of delusion, a positive superstition, an uncourse, alter the law, he hoped that in scientific error to begin with-and a such cases such a plea would be regarded foolish practice from the very first. with respect and consideration. That, became, therefore, my duty to devote of course, was very kind of him; but it myself to the solution of this question, leaves us where we were. There have and I have done so to my humble best, actually been cases where magistrates and I will not cease until this law is have asked a father objecting to vaccina- removed from the Statute Book. Now, tion whether he has lost any of his chil- I have questioned many people since I dren through it, because, otherwise, he came to that conclusion, both medical could not entertain his objection. This and lay, and I can say I have not found may, indeed, be said to be out-Heroding one man who really took the trouble to Herod. Whatever answer the House of examine this question for himself who Commons may give to my appeal to- came out of the consideration with the night-and I am quite uncertain as to same fulness of conviction with which what it may be-one thing I feel, from he entered it. Now, I should like, if my own experience and from what I the House will allow me, to give the have heard, that the amount of support opinions of some persons who are of I shall get to-night will bear a very infinitely greater importance than my. Mr. P. A. Taylor It self. [Mr. WARTON: Oh, no!] I acknowledge the kindness of the hon. and learned Member for Bridport; but I will not stoop to be flattered by it. Dr. G. F. Kolb, a distinguished German, and a member extraordinary of the Royal Statistical Commission of Bavaria, says "From childhood I have been trained to look upon the cow-pox as an absolute and unqualified protective. I have from my earliest remem brance believed in it more strongly than in any clerical tenet or ecclesiastical dogma. Open and acknowledged failures did not shake my faith; I attributed them either to the carelessness of the operator, or the badness of the lymph. In the course of time the question of vaccine compulsion came before the Reichstag, when a medical friend of mine supplied me with a mass of pro-vaccination statistics, in his opinion conclusive and unanswerable. This awoke the statistician within me. On inspection I found the figures were delusive, and a close examination left no shadow of doubt in my mind that the so-called statistical array of proof was a plete failure." com Dr. Vogt, Professor of Hygiene and Sanitary Statistics in Berne, and probably the largest collector of statistical information, entered into an examination of the figures firmly believing that they would confirm his conviction; and, having registered and abstracted the particulars of the deaths of 400,000 cases of small-pox, he was compelled to admit at the end that his belief in vaccination was absolutely destroyed. Here is the case of a German physician going into the question for the purpose of defending the practice of the vaccination. Dr. Boing, stung by the assaults of anti-vaccinationists, set himself to prove its value, and has to present with unfeigned grief the reverse. He candidly states No one can lament more than I do that the results of investigation should fall out in disfavour of compulsory vaccination. It is certainly not pleasant to be obliged to change one's convictions on so important a subject; and it is the more painful because it involves the relin. quishment of a legislative measure by means of which we believed ourselves able to cope with one of the most fearful scourges of human society." Now, Sir, this question naturally divides itself into two portions-vaccination and compulsion. It is quite possible to conceive that vaccination might be good, and compulsion unjustifiable. At the same time, if I can prove that vaccination is an evil, I shall, of course, weaken the basis of compulsion. I will address myself, with the leave of the House, for a short time to the question purely of compulsion. I think that even were vaccination to provide all the benefits that its defenders maintain, the grounds against compulsion are amply sufficient to justify its abolition. I object, then, to compulsion, because it is the most absolute invasion of the sacred right of the parent, of the right of individual liberty, at the bidding of mediThere is, in my opinion, no law upon cal supervision, that this country knows. the Statute Book, not obsolete, of so tyrannous and crushing a nature as that which compels vaccination. Let the House look for one moment to what extremities such a law leads. It amounts to the State declaring that families shall not choose their own medical men. There are plenty of medical men now who are opposed to vaccination; and yet, if such a man enters a family and gives his advice against vaccination, the State declares that the parent shall not have the right of taking such advice. A distinguished physician, not only in this country but elsewhere-Dr. Wilkinson-was the medical adviser of a man whose child was ordered to be vaccinated. The doctor remonstrated, and said But the vaccinating officer and the magistrate at Westminster laughed at the opinion of the medical man, because they found he was Vice President of the Society for the Abolition of Compulsory Vaccination. It did not much matter in this case, because the man paid the fine; but in the case of a poor man the declaration of the magistrate would have sufficed to condemn the child, perhaps to death. I object, then, again to compulsion, quite irrespective of the effects of vaccination, because, ex hypothesi, on the very ground on which it is defended, it is proved to be not needful. No one will say that the State has a right to interfere with the medical treatment of particular children. It is said that an unvaccinated child is a source of danger to the public. How can it be so when all the community are protected by vaccination? Everybody can be protected and assisted who desires to be protected and assisted; and when, there system must not stand in the way of saving thousands of lives." It saves no lives at all under any theory. As an element and a factor in the national mortality small-pox is nowhere at all. These years of small-pox epidemic are not the years of the largest general epidemic. One zymotic disease succeeds another, and the most deadly of them is not small-pox. I will read in this sense a few words from the late respected Dr. Farr, who poured contempt on the idea that vaccination could eradicate a parti "To operate on mortality, protection against every one of the zymotic diseases is required, otherwise the suppression of one disease opens the way to others." fore, you call this unvaccinated child a centre of danger and disease to the whole community-the whole protected community-I say that is an insult to the common sense of Englishmen. I object to compulsion-or rather I should object to it if I believed in vaccination-because, under any circumstances, it must be highly impolitic, because the course of a particular medical system, even if it were the best ever invented, would be sure to have many opponents. Those who really believe in vaccination, who believe in pure lymph, in good adminis-cular zymotic disease. He saidtration, in careful operation, and so forth -it is their business to bring to the homes of the poor all these things freely, and not to make them antagonistic to every favourite system by a compulsion A vicious system like this can only exist, which, under no circumstances, can be like slavery in America 40 years ago, by justifiable. I object to it, again, as a indefinite extension; and we actually flagrant case of class legislation. It is have the recommendation that the whole a flagrant case of the oppression of the community of infants is to be vaccipoor. The wealthy and those well-to-do nated against every zymotic disease, do not suffer from these laws. At the and, under the pretext of the national worst, they have to pay a fine which is health, the whole country would be made nothing to them; and in nine cases out of one vast hospital. Less, perhaps, than ten, or in 99 cases out of 100, the courtly at any other time can the demand of medical man does not trouble his client compulsion be maintained now, because with more than a simple remonstrance. a wiser and a truer school of medical That is not the case with the poor. They science has arisen of late years which cannot afford to pay the fine. They are preaches that doctrine which was preached sent to prison. If I could give to the by the late Lord Beaconsfield-the adHouse in a few words the numberless vantages of sanitation. There are now letters I have received of remonstrance men such as Dr. Richardson, Dr. Alfred and complaint and indignation, many Carpenter, the celebrated surgeon, Mr. of them accompanied with the hideous Lawson Tait, of Birmingham, and others, photographs of their mutilated infants who are adverse to vaccination, and dying from the infliction, I think I should whose opinions I do not in any degree have the most powerful argument I could misrepresent when I say that they deproduce. There is the case of our work-clare that vaccination never can, or will, houses. There go the surgeon and policeman. There go the infants vaccinated when but a few days old, and the mothers, too, a day or two after their confinement. A witness at an inquest the other day said he had vaccinated 1,500 women in that condition, and it was said that they did not object. They did not object! No; the order is-Strip your arm," and the operation is performed, and there is an end of the affair. I really think it makes one's blood burn within one's veins that they should go on so in a civilized country. May I ask what hon. Members of this House would say if their wives were to be ordered to be vaccinated on the day of, or the day after, their confinement? Then, it is said "Well, these opponents of the Mr. P. A. Taylor stamp out smali-pox; but that smallpox, and all other zymotic diseases, can, may, and shall be stamped out by sanitation. What is the argument used by hon. Gentlemen, both in and out of Parliament, in favour of this system? They say that the opinion of the Medical Profession is unanimous in its favour. I have sought medical opinion on this subject for many years, and I can answer for it that it is by no means unanimous. In the first place, medical men, like laymen, had for the most part not examined into the question at all. They simply had taken the tradition as they found it, and they had not examined into the particulars of the case. But I have found many medical men who were doubtful in their opinion, some who were anta gonistic to it altogether; and I do not hesitate to say that it is, at least, my firm conviction that not only might compulsion go, but that vaccination might go altogether, without causing any great stir amongst the large body of the Medical Profession. Now, it must be remembered that medical men-I do not say more than, but as much as, any other class of the community-are subject to the public opinion that surrounds them, and to the public opinion of their confrères; and they dare not, therefore, take a step that would be hostile to the prejudices of the day. Dr. Alfred Carpenter, explaining the other day how it was that all medical men were not teetotallers, after giving some reasons for their prejudices, their traditional opinions, and their mistakes, and so on, uttered these pregnant words "The medical man would do what is right if the public made it worth his while. All medical men cannot afford to be total abstainers, because, if they were, they would be tabooed and Boycotted.'" The same thing applies here; and I have not the least doubt that many medical men are very doubtful about vaccination. I have appealed to one or two young men-medical students-and I have said, "Won't you examine this question? Don't take the traditions of your predecessors." I am sorry to say the reply has been-"We can't afford it. We have our livelihood to make, and we must take the course open to us. We are made to say these things, and to assert the truth of vaccination before we are allowed to pass, and to make 60 practical operations. We cannot, therefore, afford to take up your abstract theories." Now, I have thought it worth while to get the opinion and advice of a number of men whom I might call the medical attendants of the poor -the chemists in our large towns-and I have received a large number of expressions of opinion from them entirely adverse to compulsory vaccination. I will not trouble the House with them; but I will venture to give the House one as a sample "I have had many opportunities of witnessing the evil effects of vaccination, as large numbers of mothers bring their children to me for advice when suffering from vaccine inflammation, and I have seen scores of the most distressing cases, where the poor child's arm has been one mass of scab and corruption; and in not a few cases I have known it to prove fatal. VOL. CCLXXX. [THIRD SERIES] Consequently, for years I have believed the law of compulsory vaccination to be a curse and a disgrace to our 19th century civilization." Now, there is one class of the community for whom I entertain no high opinion, and that is the small body of highly-paid medical gentlemen who sit behind the throne of the President of the Local Government Board, and who are more powerful on these matters than is the President of the Local Government Board. They are, I have not the slightest doubt, honourable and intelligent men; but they are men whose raison d'être is vaccination. They are irresponsible in the advice they give, or they are only responsible to the President of the Local Government Board. My right hon. Friend has probably not very deeply studied the question of vaccination. It is very natural that he should not have done so; and if I may be permitted to say so, from the answers he has given in this House, I should assume, certainly, that he had not done so. But surely it is a most unfortunate and painful position for the right hon. Gentleman to be put in, to be the mouthpiece of a set of medical experts upon doctrines upon which he has had, and can have, no sound opinion of his own. I will venture to refer to an answer given the other day. In answer to the hon. and learned Member for Stockport (Mr. Hopwood) he declared that cases of vaccinated syphilis were of the most trifling description in point of number. He also declared, in answer to my Question, whether it was not a fact, as tested by the highest medical authority, that it was impossible in many cases to detect syphilitic taint in a child from whom the lymph is taken, that he understood the Report of the Committee was that such facts must be taken in proportion to the number of cases. Now, if my right hon. Friend had taken the trouble to ask the opinion of one very talented member of that Board-Dr. Ballardhe would have come to a very different conclusion. Many years ago Dr. Ballard wrote an excellent essay upon vaccination, which gained a prize, and Dr. Ballard said— |