Lest some false interpreter should suggest that in here condemning
compulsory vaccination in the Army and Navy and urging its abolishment
I am attempting “_to incite insubordination, disloyalty, or mutiny,
or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United
States_,” as expressed in the Overman Law, I would now call careful
attention to the obvious fact that urging the abolition of a bad law,
or petitioning government “for a redress of grievances,” is not urging
_disobedience_ to any law, is not inciting mutiny or refusal of duty
or disloyalty to the United States, but is a clear constitutional
right under Article I of the first amendment, which right, it is there
stated, cannot be abridged or denied.
If any loyal soldiers, opposed to forced vaccination, should ask my
advice whether they should accept or refuse it, I would advise them
to protest against compulsion and ask for its abolition, but I would
not advise them to deliberately disobey any legal military rule. And
I would further say here that I believe that any soldier who might
be injured or killed as a result of any vaccination, to which he was
forced to submit by any military law, would suffer and die in the
service of his country with just as much honor as if he had died on the
battle-field; or with as much honor as in the case of Socrates, the
great Grecian soldier and philosopher, who died in obedience to bad law
and unjust judgment.
I would further advise all conscientious objectors to forced
vaccination to consider the teaching of some strict moralists, that it
is better to obey all laws, however bad, than to disobey any of them,
and that this _obedience_ and _sacrifice_ is the first duty of the
soldier and citizen. And it is also taught that this obedience to bad
law, after full and due protest against it, is the best way to bring
about its repeal in due time.
This seems to have been the teaching of the great Socrates--the pagan
Christ, 399 B.C.--and was the chief lesson of his tragic death. Knowing
that he was unjustly and falsely condemned and that his judges acted
wrongly, yet within the forms of law, he refused to escape this false
and unjust judgment, although he could easily have done so with the
help of powerful friends who urged this upon him. Yet he nobly accepted
the judgment of law and drank the cup of poison to which he was legally
but wrongly sentenced, and thus gave up his life to vindicate what he
believed was the sacred duty of the citizen to obey all laws, just or
unjust, and the still more sacred duty of the lawmaker and the judge,
that all laws and judgments should be absolutely just and true and
faithful to all rights of the citizen. If, therefore, it be the first
duty of the citizen and soldier to obey all law, good or bad, what a
much greater duty is laid upon the lawmaker, the law enforcer, the
Judge, and, we might also say, the Commander-in-Chief, that all law
and all judgments be absolutely right, just and true, and in no way
destructive to the rights of the citizen or soldier who has to obey
these laws, good or bad! This was the grand lesson intended by Socrates
in the sacrifice of his life as a protest and indictment against bad
law and unjust judgment, and we may here, properly, apply this great
Socratic lesson, which has morally thundered down “the corridors of
time” for the past twenty-four centuries, to all the evil laws for
compulsory vaccination which now exist and which should be immediately
repealed and replaced by just and equitable rules for voluntary
vaccination only as proved by the many reasons already given.--“Every
law not based on wisdom is a menace to the State.” See page v.
VOICE OF THE COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF TO OUR SOLDIERS, “YOU HAVE COMMANDERS,
BUT YOU HAVE NO MASTERS.” RIGHTS AND DIGNITIES OF SOLDIERS ASSERTED.
MILITARY AND MEDICAL DESPOTISM CONDEMNED
At this point, Mr. President, I want to remind you of the rich American
thought you expressed in your address to the American soldiers on the
battle-field in France, at Chaumont, on Christmas Day, 1918. You were
reported to have there said:
“... this is not a war in which the soldiers of the free
nations have obeyed masters. You have commanders, but you have
no masters. Your very commanders represent you in representing
the nation of which you constitute so distinguished a part.”
Now, the true American thought in this quotation, as I take it, is
that, as American soldiers and citizens, they are free men and members
of a free state, with American rights and dignities that cannot be
invaded, and are not “slaves,” “chattels,” or “subjects” to any one,
and, therefore, are not to be treated by any form of military despotism
or arbitrary medical dictation, as slaves, hogs, or cattle might be
so treated. And as the hog or cattle doctor might properly force any
medicine down the throat of the helpless beast without being required
to say “by your leave” to his humble patient, or might perform on the
body of the helpless animal any operation that he or the owner might
decide upon, yet I think that neither of us would admit that any man
calling himself a human doctor could, with any decency, propriety,
or legality, follow this crude but necessary code of ethics of the
animal doctor on the human subject by attempting to perform any medical
service on the human body by any intimidation or force or without
full approval and consent of the patient. Yet what have we seen? We
have seen men, calling themselves doctors, claiming the right to
force dangerous medical operations on school children and soldiers
without their free will and consent, and with some form of barbarous
intimidation or coercion, as they might do with dangerous beasts. We
have seen loyal soldiers, conscientiously objecting to unnecessary
and dangerous operations on their bodies against their approval or
consent, who were tried by court-martial and condemned to imprisonment
at _hard labor for twenty-five years_! And this outrageous sentence was
inflicted for nothing more than for asserting one of the most obvious
and unalienable rights of every American--the right to the medical
sanctity of his own body, the right to medical freedom, choice, and
consent in any medical treatment of that body!
Is it not time, therefore, Mr. President, that this clear American
principle expressed in your address just quoted should now be applied
in this matter, and that this _Medical Hoggery_ of compulsory
vaccination should be abolished in our Army and Navy? And is it not
time also that the members of that “Divine” profession of Human
Healing, in all its schools and sects, should now take action at the
earliest possible day to purge their great profession from the deep
disgrace of this _Medical Hoggery_, which they have originated and too
long practiced, and which is involved in all forms of dictatorial and
compulsory medicine on the human subject?
Of course, in anything I say here I make no reflection on the
veterinary doctors whose work, in its own sphere, I regard just as
honorable as the work of any other doctors in their sphere.
COMPULSORY VACCINATION NOT NECESSARY AND NOT EFFECTIVE FOR THE HEALTH
OF ARMIES OR POPULATIONS. FAILURE OF VACCINATION IN U. S. ARMY
OFFICIALLY ADMITTED
There is another strong consideration which I think should move you,
Mr. President, toward abolishing this evil of compulsory vaccination
with “cruel and unusual” punishment, and that is: That this compulsion
and punishment is not really necessary for any military purpose or
efficiency, as is proved by several facts in the past and present
practice and experience of our own and other armies, for example:
_First_: In the Russian-Japanese war the Japanese adopted for almost
the first time the modern, effective system of general military
sanitation and hygiene, but used no typhoid vaccination, and yet the
army suffered very little from typhoid fever. _Second_: Per contra,
in the Gallipoli expedition in the recent war the English soldiers
were generally inoculated with typhoid vaccines, but at the same
time the most unsanitary conditions prevailed in camp and field,
and the result was a great loss from typhoid and other fevers among
the vaccinated. _Third_: In the U. S. Army in France in 1918, in
several camps where sanitation and hygiene were grossly neglected,
typhoid vaccination proved to be little or no protection, and it has
been officially admitted to be a great failure, as typhoid epidemics
prevailed extensively in said camps with a high death-rate among the
well vaccinated men. See official report on this subject from the
Chief Surgeon of the A. E. F. in U. S. Public Health Reports of March
28, 1919, entitled, “Typhoid Vaccination no Substitute for Sanitary
Precautions.” See also page 207 in the annexed Supplement. _Fourth_:
Vaccination is now voluntary in the English Army, and it is estimated
that from five to ten per cent. of the Army is unvaccinated. _Fifth_:
There is no court-martial or punishment for refusing vaccination in
the English Army, as is shown by a recent inquiry in the English
Parliament, reported as follows:
“Official Parliamentary Debates, April 23, 1918, Column 833.
“Mr. Chancellor asked the Under-Secretary for War, Mr.
Macpherson:
“_Question A._ Whether refusal of vaccination by any soldier
is a military crime. _Answer A._ Refusal by a soldier to be
vaccinated is not an offence punishable under the Army Act.
“_Question B._ Whether any officer is authorized to inflict
punishment of any kind for such refusal. _Answer B._ No officer
is authorized to inflict punishment for such refusal.
“_Question C._ Whether the fact of a man who joined when
vaccination was compulsory, having assented reluctantly then,
alters his legal position now that vaccination is no longer
subject to legal compulsion in the Army. _Answer C._ Soldiers
voluntarily enlisted who, at the time of their enlistment,
agreed in their attestation papers to be vaccinated, cannot be
punished under the Army Act for refusing to be vaccinated.”
Now, in these facts I think it is distinctly proved that
compulsory vaccination is neither necessary nor surely effective as a
protective remedy, but is of doubtful value as a preventive, and is not
necessary where efficient sanitation and hygiene are used, as is now
the practice in modern armies; and, hence, vaccination should not be
forced on any soldier or sailor under penalty of drastic punishments
for refusal, but should be left to the free and voluntary assent of
each man, as it now is in the English Army. Furthermore, it is believed
that, instead of forcing wholesale compulsory disease upon the Army,
with the vain idea of increasing health, equal effort and expense
devoted to true sanitation and hygiene would surely produce better
results, as emphatically proved by recent critical experience in our
own Army, as just cited. See also page 210.
MEDICAL AND OTHER AUTHORITIES ADMIT DANGERS OF VACCINATION AND CONDEMN
COMPULSION
Surely the example of the English Army, as above given, is a good
enough precedent and authority to justify abolishing all compulsion
and penalties and making all vaccination voluntary in our American
Army and Navy, but if any other authorities are required for this
reform, I might cite for a second example the advice from one of the
highest medical authorities of to-day, viz., Osler’s “Modern Medicine,”
new edition, 1913, Volume I, page 848, which admits the dangers of
vaccination and condemns compulsion in these words:
“With the greatest care, however, certain risks are present
and so it is unwise for the physician to force the operation
upon those who are unwilling, or to give assurances of absolute
harmlessness.”
I will now ask your attention to a third authority against
compulsion, which is of the highest significance and force, viz., the
great English Commission on Vaccination appointed by Queen Victoria
in 1889, which sat for about seven years, made a most exhaustive
examination of the subject, and rendered its voluminous reports in
1896. This Commission was composed of five of the leading doctors and
eight of the leading laymen of England, and their majority and minority
reports differed on the merits of vaccination, but both admitted its
dangers and both agreed in advising the repeal or modification of the
English compulsory law, which, however, did not apply to adults, but
only to infants under one year, which form the most susceptible part
of the population. After this recommendation a law was passed, now in
force, called the “conscientious clause,” whereby parents can exempt
their children from vaccination by filing a statement of conscientious
objection; and under this law vaccination has so greatly declined in
England that to-day it is estimated that over sixty per cent. of the
children born are unvaccinated, and yet, contrary to the contentions of
the vaccinators, smallpox has not increased, but has greatly declined,
corresponding to the decline in vaccination and to the increase in
general sanitation and hygiene, as England is now one of the most
sanitary countries in the world. This beneficial effect on public
health resulting from repealing compulsion and making vaccination
voluntary has been so positive that the English Minister of Health,
Hon. John Burns, made this significant public declaration in the House
of Commons on April 12, 1911, viz.: “Just in proportion as, in recent
years, exemptions [from vaccination] have gone up from four per cent.
to thirty per cent., so deaths from smallpox have declined.”
I will now add a fourth and last example in which I think you will
find a full justification for suppressing all compulsory vaccination
as both evil and unnecessary, and this is the advice of one of the
latest English books on “The Vaccination Question” by Dr. Millard,
London, 1914. Dr. Millard, although a strong pro-vaccinist, has been
for the past ten years the health officer of the unvaccinated city of
Leicester, which has a population of about 300,000, and for the last
thirty years has relied on sanitation and hygiene without vaccination
to protect and improve the public health, and this is the gist of what
Dr. Millard says of the success of this method:
“The two crucial and outstanding facts which I wish to lay
stress upon, are:
“(_a_) The unexpected and remarkable experience of the town
of Leicester, which for thirty years has abandoned infantile
vaccination, yet has shown an enormous decline in smallpox
mortality.
“(_b_) The fact that, although infantile vaccination is falling
more and more into disuse throughout the whole country, yet
smallpox, contrary to all pro-vaccinist expectation and
prophecy, continues to decline and has almost disappeared.
... “The striking facts that in Leicester, without infantile
vaccination, the decline has been greater than in most places,
and that throughout the country smallpox has continued to
decrease in spite of the falling off in vaccination, should
surely be sufficient grounds for legitimate doubt.
... “If it can be shown that ‘sanitation,’ thoroughly carried
out, is alone sufficient for the effective control of smallpox
in this country (as in Leicester), why inflict upon the
community universal vaccination with all its inseparable
drawbacks? Moreover, what justification can there be any longer
for compulsion?
“It cannot be denied that vaccination causes, in the aggregate,
very considerable injury to health, most of it only temporary,
but some permanent.... We must never forget that vaccination
is an evil. Vaccinia is just as much a disease as smallpox,
though a less serious one, and all diseases must be regarded as
evil and to be avoided, if possible. There is not the slightest
evidence that vaccination, apart from its effect in preventing
smallpox, is of the least value or anything but detrimental
to the human race.... During the last decade the deaths from
vaccinia have several times outnumbered those from smallpox,
whilst if we have regard to the amount of ill health caused by
the two diseases (and putting aside for the moment the question
of the alleged effect of vaccination in lessening smallpox) it
looks as if vaccinia were becoming, so far as the community is
concerned, the more serious disease of the two.”
DEATHS FROM VACCINATION GREATER THAN DEATHS FROM SMALLPOX. SHOCKING
DENIAL AND CONCEALMENT OF VACCINATION DEATHS BY OUR DEPARTMENTS OF
HEALTH AND VITAL STATISTICS
It will be seen from the last quotation that Dr. Millard is one of
those honest doctors who are not afraid to tell the truth about
vaccination, its great dangers and frequent fatalities, the evils and
barbarities of compulsion, the superior value of sanitation, and the
stinging fact that the inflicted disease, vaccinia, frequently causes
more deaths per year than the natural disease, smallpox! To confirm
these startling facts I will now quote a few figures, during the period
to which Dr. Millard refers, from the record of the Registrar General
of England which, as you know, is one of the highest statistical
authorities in the world.
Data from Reports of Registrar General of England showing deaths from
vaccination compared with deaths from smallpox:
_Total Deaths_ _Total Deaths_
_Year_ _from Smallpox_ _from Vaccination_
1906 21 29
1907 10 12
1908 12 13
Total Deaths from Smallpox for six years, 1905 to 1910 199
Total Deaths from Vaccination for six years, 1905 to 1910 99
Deaths from Smallpox in said period under 5 years old 26
Deaths from Vaccination in said period under 5 years old 98
From these remarkable figures we will see that for the six years from
1905 to 1910, in England and Wales, the total deaths from vaccination
for all ages were about half the total deaths from smallpox, but that
in the same period the total deaths from vaccination, in the child
ages of five years and under, were nearly _four times_ the deaths from
smallpox in the same age group!
The report of the English Registrar General for the three years, 1911,
1912, and 1913, tell a similar story of vaccinal fatality, as follows:
Total Deaths from Smallpox for all ages for
three years, 1911 to 1913 42
Total Deaths from Vaccination for all ages in said three years 31
Deaths from Smallpox in children under 5 years 8
Deaths from Vaccination in children of same age 30
Here it will be noted that for the three years stated the total deaths
from vaccination are three-quarters of the total deaths from smallpox,
whereas the deaths from vaccination in children five years old and
under are over three times more than the deaths from smallpox in the
same age group! I have not examined the Reports later than 1913, having
confined myself to the decade to which Dr. Millard refers.
This awful record of fatal vaccinations thus speaks very clearly
for itself and forms a strong indictment of the whole barbarous and
dangerous system of compulsory vaccination, whether for child or adult,
and must condemn the evil practice in every rational mind.
It can be further proved that an equal or greater fatality from
vaccination, as compared with the English records, occurs in our own
country and in our own State of New York, but these fatalities are
denied and concealed in our death certificates and yearly reports by
our vaccinating doctors and health officials of city and State, as I
have repeatedly and publicly charged, and have challenged these doctors
and officials to deny or disprove this charge if they can, and I now
hereby renew this public challenge on this most serious point. See
challenge on page vi.
For further data on this point, see my pamphlets, “The Crime
Against the School Child,” “Open Your Eyes,” “Serious Warning,” and
“Vaccination and Lockjaw.”
GREAT EPIDEMICS OF DEADLY DISEASE, IN ANIMALS AND MANKIND, CAUSED BY
VACCINATION
Now, not only is vaccination very dangerous to health and life in many
individual cases and frequently causes more deaths every year than
smallpox, particularly in little children, as already clearly proved,
but another shocking fact is that vaccination has been proved to be the
cause of several great epidemics of deadly disease among mankind and
domestic animals, and has probably also been the cause of many other
serious epidemics whose origin has not yet been proved.
This shocking fact of vaccine epidemics in recent times is readily
proved by current medical works, by Government Reports, and by
notorious public facts occurring within the last few years, as I will
now show.
I may first refer on this point to one of the strongest pro-vaccination
works now published, viz., “Acute Contagious Diseases,” by Drs. Welch
and Schamberg, Lea Brothers & Co., Philadelphia, 1905. On page 65, in
this work, the following serious admission is made:
“Several appalling epidemics of septicemia after vaccination
are on record; one occurred in the United States, one in
Germany, and one in France.”
These epidemics are shown to have caused many deaths in children and
adults, the fatal effect being very rapid, the deaths occurring in one
or a few days after vaccination.
On page 74, in the same work, this clear admission of an epidemic of
that most awful and fatal disease, lockjaw, caused by vaccination, is
made as follows:
“In October, November, and December, 1901, there was a small
epidemic of tetanus after vaccination in Camden, Philadelphia,
and to a certain extent in near-by towns.
“Camden had eleven cases, and Philadelphia even more than this
number.”
It is to be here noted, however, that, bad as this last admission is,
the pro-vaccinators did not give the public the whole truth in this
last statement, but which I will now add here, viz., that in these
epidemics the deaths from the lockjaw infection in the vaccination
wounds exceeded by manifold the deaths from smallpox in the same
time and locality! Here is another great proof of the medical and
statistical truth to which I have repeatedly called attention, viz.,
that vaccination is frequently a much more dangerous and fatal disease
than natural smallpox, and, therefore, obviously, for this reason
alone, should not be forced on any person against free will and consent.