Page:ONCE A WEEK JUL TO DEC 1860.pdf/495

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.
Oct. 27, 1860.]
REPRESENTATIVE MEN.
487

this treatment. But this, great as it was, was a minor evil.

In contemplating the advantage to individuals of undergoing the small-pox under chosen and favourable circumstances, in the midst of health, and when parents and nurses were at liberty to attend upon the patient, everybody seemed to overlook the certain consequences of keeping the disease always alive and afloat. In a little while, everybody near the inoculated patient who had any susceptibility to the disease took it; and the mortality rose from year to year till, in Jenner's time, it far exceeded that from any known disease. Even under the perpetual weeding which was going on, from the constant prevalence of the malady, the deaths were one in four of those attacked; and in the hospitals, the average of mortality was thirty per cent. The parents of children who had been early secured by inoculation blessed the Englishwoman who had brought the boon to the firesides of her countrymen: but observers who took a wider range of view said that, admirable as was her courage, and excellent as were her intentions, she had caused the premature death of thousands of each generation since her own, by turning the occasional sweep of the pestilence into a constant pressure, incalculably more fatal. The effect was so obvious that in France, where the mischief had fixed universal attention, inoculation for small-pox was forbidden by royal authority in 1763: and in Spain the practice was almost entirely suppressed; in consequence of which the mortality from small-pox was smaller, in proportion to the population, than in any other country in Europe.

Under such circumstances as those of his time, Jenner could not but be eager, on the one hand, to establish an antidote to the disease; and, anxious, on the other hand, to make sure of his facts before he published them. Hence the caution he gave to his friend Gardner, at the end of a ride they took in 1780, in the course of which Jenner disclosed the whole history of his researches into the pustular diseases of cows, for ten years past. He urged upon his friend that the conversation was confidential, because "if anything untoward" should turn up in his experiments, the profession would mock at him, the public would complain of being deceived, and the whole benefit would be delayed or lost.

The "untoward" circumstance which made a world of mischief soon after, and well nigh broke Jenner's spirit, was one which @he@ had had the patience to study and master :—the fact that more than one pustular disease of the cow affected the hands of the milkers, and could not be distinguished by them from the true cowpock. Of course their testimony was caught at by the profession, on every occasion of small-pox following the false cowpock. The doctors themselves did not stop to learn distinctions, but vaccinated with anything that came from a cow, or from milkers who had had any kind of sore to show as caused by the cow. There were even instances of surgeons who charged their lancets and "threads" from the pustules of small-pox! Jenner was in no way to blame for the mistakes made. He had ascertained every point he could think of as ascertainable: he had carefully explained how much remained doubtful: he asked for facts, and most earnestly for such as might seem to show him to be wrong: he set aside every consideration but that of putting a stop to the small-pox. Nothing could exceed his candour, his modesty, his disinterestedness. But how about his courage? some may ask.

I should say that the mere act of publishing his "Inquiry into the Causes and Effects of the Variolæ Vaccinæ," with his keen prevision of the reception it would meet with from the profession, who would be followed by the public, proves an extraordinary amount of moral courage in a man so retiring, so sensitive, and so prone to despondency as Jenner. It is no contradiction that he afterwards suffered torture, and did not attempt to conceal it. "I am beset on all sides by snarling fellows," he writes, "and so ignorant withal that they know no more of the disease they write about than the animals which generate it. . . . It is impossible for me, single-handed, to combat all my adversaries. Standing, as I do, before so awful a tribunal, my friends will volunteer their counsel, and immediately appear in court. Give me as much of your company as you can, and as speedily." We find him imploring his friends not to neglect him, complaining of wrong, overwork, depression, and poverty; longing for life to be over; suffering bitterly, in short, but never for a moment falling below his duty, failing to assert his cause, or losing his characteristic modesty and candour in dealing with opponents. Any man who was not brave would have bullied his enemies more or less, or given up the cause.

The highest courage was required, also, to try the first express experiment of vaccination. It took place on a day, the anniversary of which was held as a festival at Berlin and elsewhere, not long ago, and may be still, for aught I know. On the 14th of May, 1796, Jenner vaccinated a boy of the name of Phipps, eight years old, from the hand of a dairywoman who had the true cowpock: the boy went well through the experiment, was inoculated for small-pox in July, and failed to take it. From this time forward, it was the custom to make the 14th of May a day of rejoicing in Prussia and elsewhere, and to publish the annual results of vaccination. For many years the vaccinations exceeded the births, showing that the people were aware of their danger, while any remained unsecured. In Prussia, the deaths from small-pox had averaged 40,000 annually before vaccination was introduced; and within twenty years they had sunk to 3,000, though there had been a large accession of new territory. Sweden, and Denmark, and some territories in Germany remained absolutely free from small-pox for twenty years after the practice of vaccination had been properly adopted. A sudden change from the few preceding years when 600,000 persons died annually of small-pox in the world at large, and 210,000 in Europe; and when every quarter of a century saw twenty-five millions of human beings carried off by the foulest of distempers!

When the good sense of society got the better