JENNER RELIEVED--1807.
Whilst the Royal College of Physicians were preparing their
report, there was perturbation in the political world. Dull
and bigoted George III. refusing on the pretext of his oath to
concede to Roman Catholics the rights of citizens, a change of
administration ensued, and Mr. Perceval, a man after the King’s own
heart, replaced Lord Henry Petty as Chancellor of the Exchequer,
and proceeded to give effect to the plan for relieving Jenner; a
purpose for which the report “On the State of Vaccine Inoculation
in the United Kingdom” was merely a blind.
On the 29th July, 1807, the House of Commons being in Committee
of Supply, Mr. PERCEVAL moved that Dr. Jenner be awarded a second
sum of £10,000 for his matchless discovery. Smallpox was one
of the greatest afflictions of mankind, from which hardly any
one escaped. For this dreadful malady, Jenner had invented a
preventive, unknown before, or if known, which had never been
published. He did not therefore think the Committee would consider
his proposal extravagant; indeed it was rather an act of justice
than of liberality. Those who had read the Report of the Physicians
would recognise the immense advantages of the new practice. As for
its inconveniences, they were as nothing to those which attended
Variolous Inoculation, and the few mistakes recorded were due
to ignorance and carelessness. It might be objected by those
who adhered to Mr. Malthus, that nothing was gained by saving
lives from pestilence; for deaths were not losses where means of
subsistence were inadequate; but for his part he would disregard
the argument even if it were true. It was much better to follow the
dictates of their hearts, and preserve life whenever it was within
their power. He had often heard that the true riches of a state
were its inhabitants. But he would not attempt to measure Jenner’s
award by the number of lives that his invention would preserve to
the world. If he did so, what sum would they have to offer! All he
need say was, that the £10,000 proposed represented no more than a
moderate acknowledgment of labour and genius devoted to the service
of humanity.
Mr. SHAW LEFEVRE opposed the motion. He had thought the former
application for £20,000 excessive, and had concurred with those
who reduced it to £10,000. He had moreover acquiesced in the
smaller sum by reason of his faith in the report of the Committee
of the House on the New Inoculation, but he now discovered that
many of the statements in that report were erroneous. It attested
that Vaccination was an infallible preventive of smallpox, whilst
the report of the Surgeons now admits 56 failures! The first
report stated that no disease followed Vaccination, whilst now
it is confessed that scrofula and other alarming symptoms are its
occasional sequences! The report thus prejudicial to Vaccination
nevertheless argues in its favour, and he would like to call
witnesses to the bar of the House who would make manifest still
further its inconsistencies and inaccuracies. At this late period
of the session, it was not right to vote away such an amount of
public money. [Such “late periods” are, however, always selected
for jobs.] Besides, it was generally known that Benjamin Jesty
of Worth in Dorsetshire discovered the use of cowpox long before
Jenner, and if the House was resolved to be liberal, the reward
should be shared with Jesty, or with Jesty’s family. He should
oppose the vote, but he did not say that he would always do so. His
purpose was to gain time for more careful inquiry.
Lord HENRY PETTY, who had first moved in the matter, came to
his successor’s support. He had no doubt as to the efficacy of
Vaccination, nor as to Jenner being its discoverer. His difficulty
was to find a rule for the justice of the case; for whoever
considered the value of the discovery must perceive that it would
be impossible for them to deal generously with the discoverer. His
service to mankind was entirely beyond any financial estimate.
It was objected that Vaccination was not infallible. He replied
that absolute, never-failing perfection ought not to be expected
from any human device: they should rest well satisfied in the
approximation to infallibility that belonged to Vaccination. Its
daily benefits were numberless. Multitudes of seamen, soldiers,
and citizens of every description had been saved by it, and in
contemplating its future effects on the human race, the mind was
lost in amazement and gratitude. How then should they presume to
talk of liberality towards Jenner, the benefactor! They should
recollect how he stands in the estimation of the world, how they
were acting in view of all nations, and how their own characters
were at stake in their demeanour towards him. As to Malthus there
was a misapprehension. He had taught nothing that forbade the
extinction of an infectious disease which so greatly reduced human
happiness. In their concern for Vaccination, the House should not
forget the mischief that was still wrought by inoculation with
smallpox. Zealous as he was for the new practice, he had no wish to
meddle with what others might imagine (however absurdly) tended to
their own preservation and that of their families, but no one had a
right to endanger the lives of others. It was proved beyond dispute
that those who were inoculated with smallpox diffused the fatal
contagion by going abroad, or being carried abroad. He thought,
therefore, it was not only the right, but the duty of the State to
oblige those who were infected with smallpox to keep within doors
until complete recovery. He would not move an amendment to the
resolution, but would have no hesitation in acceding to a larger
sum.
General TARLETON could not withhold his tribute of praise from
the author of this blessing to mankind. To his knowledge, it had
saved the lives of many in his Majesty’s service. Soldiers could
march and perform every military duty when under the process of
vaccination. It had been said that gentlemen in the army had no
respect for anything save success in war, but he thought that many
officers knew how to admire Jenner, the preserver of millions, and
to allow that in future ages his glory would exceed the renown of
the greatest warriors.
Mr. STURGES BOURNE denounced the practice of inoculating
out-patients at the Smallpox Hospital whereby the disease was
systematically perpetuated and diffused throughout the community.
He thought the legislature would be as much justified in taking
measures to prevent this evil by restraint, as a man would be in
snatching a firebrand out of the hands of a maniac just as he was
going to set fire to a city.
Mr. HAWKINS BROWNE confessed with shame that he had voted for
£10,000 instead of £20,000 in 1802; but at that time he little
knew the extent of Jenner’s service to the human race.
Mr. EDWARD MORRIS did not think that even what had been said
sufficiently set forth their debt of gratitude to Jenner. His
discovery afforded a reasonable expectation of the extermination
of smallpox, and the merit of the transcendent discovery was all
his own. Inoculation in the old mode mitigated the disease in a
few, and spread it in full fury over many. It was therefore a
curse to mankind instead of a blessing. The Smallpox Hospital in
its practice of inoculation, was a source of pestilence and a
multiplier of victims to this deplorable distemper. The pre-eminent
distinction of Vaccination was that it preserved its subject and
injured no one. This unspeakable blessing they owed to Jenner,
nor had the least improvement been effected upon his original and
carefully matured prescription. They were bound to consider how
he had abandoned the lucrative pursuit of his profession, and
surrendered many years of his life for the good of his country and
mankind. He would therefore submit an amendment to the resolution
before the Committee, that the grant be £20,000 instead of £10,000,
to mark their sense of Jenner’s merits and to place him in a state
of independence.
The amendment was warmly supported by Mr. Wilberforce, Mr. Windham,
Sir John Sebright, and Mr. Herbert.
Mr. PERCEVAL, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, stood to his
resolution, but with indifferent arguments. It was without
precedent that a vote recommended by Government should be thus
increased. He admitted that Jenner was entitled to much more than
they could afford, but it was also without precedent that so great
a sum as £30,000 (inclusive of the former vote) should be bestowed
on any discoverer.
Mr. WILLIAM SMITH would not submit to these objections. He recited
the triumphs of Vaccination in Asia and America, and said it was
true as of old that a prophet had no honour in his own country.
[An observation singularly inapplicable to Jenner.] He urged the
Committee to vote for the larger sum, and said that whilst the
Chancellor of the Exchequer might in his public capacity protest,
yet in his secret heart he would not be displeased if overborne by
the sentiment of the House, of the country, and of the world.
Mr. WHITBREAD begged the Committee to bear in mind that Jenner
had scorned to monopolise Vaccination, and had thereby sacrificed
a great fortune. He called on the House to vote for the larger
sum. Vaccination furnished the means for lessening the poor rate.
Reduced smallpox signified fewer deaths, fewer orphans, fewer
widows. Vaccination meant better health for the poor and more money
in the pockets of the rich. They would excuse this appeal of his
to the cupidity of the landed interest inasmuch as he had been
anticipated in the exhibition of loftier considerations. He also
wished to relieve the House from a renewal of this question. Let
them reward Jenner once for all, and liberally: and remember that
what was called economy in this connection, if practised by the
House, would be, in the eye of the world, their disgrace.
Others spoke in a similar strain, and when the House divided, 60
voted for Mr. Morris’s amendment, and 47 against it, £20,000 being
carried by a majority of 13. Including the £10,000 voted in 1802,
Jenner was thus awarded £30,000 of public money, in times, too, of
war and scarcity.
The debate, it will be observed, was conducted in a House of
107 members at a late period of the session, and the variations
among the speakers consisted in degrees of extravagance and
credulity. The fabulous matter as to Jenner personally affords
curious evidence of the manner in which legends originate in the
presence of contemporaries, and how they come to be repeated with
the fervour of good faith by men whose competence and honesty
might be taken for unimpeachable. Jenner’s party had whipped
up their adherents, and the issue was sedulously arranged for;
but because they had their way it need not be assumed that it
was necessary to circumvent any active adversaries. Apathy was
their chief difficulty. There was little to be got out of cowpox
by the ordinary politician; and then, as now, the average M.P.
rarely committed himself to any project that did not obviously
make for his popularity. As for the enthusiasm for Vaccination
displayed by the speakers in the House, we have to recollect
that they were not converts to the practice _per se_. No really
new discovery was ever received with such an instant chorus of
approbation by the mob, educated or uneducated. They were one and
all bred under the severe and dangerous practice of Variolous
Inoculation, whereof Vaccination was no more than a modification
with a seductive promise of equal or greater security from
smallpox, and exemption from its perils and annoyances. Unless this
prepossession be allowed for, the conduct of Parliament toward
Jenner cannot be rightly understood. There was not a word uttered
against Vaccination from the ground which physiologists at this
day occupy, for that ground, in a scientific sense, was as yet
unknown. Smallpox was a mysterious visitation to be mysteriously
dealt with--dodged, if possible, by medical artifice; and not, as
we are persuaded, a crisis of impurity in the blood induced by foul
conditions of life, which cannot be better disposed of than in the
course of nature by eruptive fever. If we could suppress smallpox
(in any other way than by the removal of its causes) we should
merely alter its manifestation and have to accept it in some other
and aggravated form of disease.