cases where the small-pox was said to have appeared in the same person twice, viz. after inoculation pustules came out to the number of from sixty to a hundred, they maturated and scabbed regularly: however, in two or three years afterwards being exposed to the infection, they again took the disease, and had a copious eruption of pustules, which likewise maturated and scabbed regularly. "Mr. Ring mentions a gentleman who inoculated the inhabitants of two or three villages, with variolous matter, as he supposed, in consequence of which an eruptive fever and a mild form of disease resembling small-pox made its appearance at the usual time: but after these people had been well some months, one half of them nearly took the small-pox by contagion, and some had it very unfavourably. He quotes, from the memoirs of the Medical Society of London, a similar instance of failure. I myself, have met with such cases." Our author is inclined to attribute these anomalies to some irregularity either in the first or second disease; we acknowledge they militate against a very general law of the constitution, but at the same time, the evidence for them is so direct and powerful, that we do not see how it can be resisted. In whichever way, however, we may decide, it is perfectly fair, to reason in the same manner about the supposed failures of the cow-pox. The author proposes to arrange his observations under the following heads: "1. Local appearance and progress of inoculated cow-pock, under its most perfect form. 2. Remarks on its several stages, and the minute differences which are commonly observed therein. "3. Varieties frequently observed, but which are not incompatible with the genuine disease. appears to contain the most essential circumstances. His experience leads him to conclude, that when a large quantity of matter is taken from the same pustule, it is rendered less active; by irritating or pressing upon the part a serous or purulent secretion seems to be formed, which possesses the specific qualities of the virus in a less degree. The eruptions that have occasionally attended vaccination he supposes are always dependant upon some nected with the disease, at the same time extraneous cause, and not necessarily conhe acknowledges, that he has frequently seen a rash, much like red gum, appear on the arm, and sometimes over the whole body, a few days after inoculation, which, however, was of short duration.' Among the deviations of greater magnitude,' the most important appears to be too early or too great a degree of inflammation; this may be produced by the application of improper matter, or when proper matter is applied, its qualities may be impaired or destroyed, so that it will no longer produce its specific action in The author securing the constitution. tule may go through its regular stages, very properly observes, that the local pusand produce the proper secretion, and yet the constitution may not be affected; this also takes place occasionally in small-pox, and it is not unreasonable to conclude, that in the one case, as well as in the other, the subject will not be exempted from future attacks of the small-pox. Dr. Jenner decidedly adopts this opinion, and yet the constitutional affection has been almost entirely overlooked by many of the most zealous advocates for vaccination. It must be confessed, that our knowledge is still defective as to the method of ascertaining when the constitution has been affected. The author properly advises, that wherever there has been the smallest doubt respecting the first inoculation, a second operation should be had recourse to. It is well known that a local pustule, possessing all the characteristic of the disease, may be excited, either in properties small-pox or in cow-pox, in those persons who have previously gone through the proper constitutional affection. This circumstance has not been sufficiently attended to, in some of the experiments that have been performed upon the effects of the small-pox inoculation after vaccination. It has been deemed a sufficient proof that the constitution was not secur➡ ed by the cow-pox, if a local pustule 3 H could be excited, and if matter from this was capable of communicating the smallpox to others. The two diseases bear a strong analogy to each other with respect to the existence of what have been called spurious varieties, which may be transmitted by inoculation, but which do not prevent the subsequent recurrence of the genuine disease. With respect to the effects of vaccination upon the general health, after a fair review of the opinions that have been delivered upon the subject, there is more evidence in favour of its improving than of its injuring the constitution: its salutary effects have been particularly noticed in cutaneous eruptions and in scrofulous affections, the very complaints which its antagonists accuse it of producing; perhaps this contrariety of opinion should induce us to conclude that the cow-pox has no effect upon the constitution at large either as to inducing or removing disease. We have next some minute but useful observations, upon the proper selection of the vaccine virus, the method of procuring it, and conveying it from place to place. Our attention to these circumstances, though apparently trifling, is of the first importance, for it is demonstrated by much experience, that the specific qualities of the virus are not obtained, if we either take it from the arm at an improper period, or do not use the necessary precautions in our manner of preserving it. We shall conclude our remarks upon this trea tise, by observing, that although so much has been written on the subject of cowpox, we have not met with any work which contains more useful matter in the same compass. ART. XXV.-Report of the Progress of Vaccination in Bengal. By JOHN SHOOLBRED, Superintendant-general of Vaccine Inoculation. 8vo. pp. 93. THIS pamphlet will afford gratification to the friends of humanity, as well as to those interested in the improvement of medical science, by exhibiting the exertions that have been employed to introduce the vaccine inoculation into India, and the success which has at length attended these exertions. The matter of cow-pox was sent by lord Elgin from Constantinople, by way of Bagdat and Bassora, to Bombay. Many disappointments and failures were experienced before the transmission could be accomplished, in consequence of the difficulty which there is in preserving the virus unimpaired in a temperature so high as that which usually obtains in these places. It arrived at Bombay in June 1802, and after some farther difficulties, was received at Calcutta in the November following. The government immediately set on foot an establishment, where a supply might at all times be found, and subordinate establishments were also formed at different places, for the purpose of dispersing it through the country. These measures appear to have been peculiarly necessary, from the difficulty which was experienced in consequence of the heat of the climate, not only in preserving the matter, but even in communicating the infection from one individual to another. The arrangements appear to have been judicious and successful. The matter was afterwards sent to Prince of Wales's Island, but from some unfortunate circumstance was lost there; it has been also sent to Sumatra, a country where the small-pox is most peculiarly destructive. The total number of persons vaccinated in this part of the world, at the end of the year 1803, was above 11,000, a number which we apprehend most of our readers will consider as affording an ample proof of the exertions of Mr. Shoolbred and his colleagues. It seems, however, scarcely to have equalled his expectations, and he deems it necessary to state the reasons for its slow progress. Pp. 18 and 19. The report does not occupy more than one-fourth of the pamphlet ; the remainder is occupied with a series of sections, in which we meet with a good deal of information upon the phenomena of the disease, the effects of the climate upon it, the method of transmitting it from place to place, and the supposed antiquity of the practice among the Bramins. After having in the first section satisfac torily proved that the genuine matter has been received in the, East Indies, he proceeds in the second to show that its character and specific properties are not lost by its being transmitted from one subject to another, notwithstanding the heat and moisture of the atmosphere of Bengal. He remarks indeed that he has seen very few instances where there were any irregular appearances, and he altogether objects to the term spurious cow-pox. In this point we must, however, differ from our author: the cow is subject to other eruptive diseases, besides the one which gives a security against the small pox; these are certainly entitled to the appellation of vaccine, and may, we think, be very appropriately distinguished from the other species by the term spurious. As during the hottest part of the year the virus becomes considerably less active, so that frequent failures take place, it becomes a subject of the first importance to ascertain what is the best method of preserving a constant supply of matter in these seasons. Mr. Shoolbred found, contrary to the opinion of some of the first promoters of vaccination, that the disease cannot be excited in those who have already experienced it, or in those who have previously had the small-pox. The same conclusion has been formed by Pearson, so that the expedient which was suggested, of keeping up a supply of matter by inoculating such persons, could not be had recourse to. The author, however, conceived that the necessary supply might be afforded by communicating the disease to the cow: the experiment so far succeeded, that the animal received the dis ease, and matter taken from it affected the human subject; but it was found that it could not, with any degree of certainty, be propagated from one cow to another. Mr. Shoolbred found that the matter was the most certainly conveyed from place to place, by its being between glass plates, secured with the usual precautions. After making an extensive enquiry into the subject, it appears that the disease has never been found among the cows of India; a passage in a Sanscrit MS. which spoke of it as known to the Bramins, has been discovered to be a forgery. The variolous inoculation is now prohibited at Calcutta, and the small-pox has since that time scarcely made its appearance there. The operation was formerly practised at a particular season of every year, and thus an artificial epidemic was produced, which, by its frequent recurrence, probably proved more destructive to the community at large, than if the disease had been permitted to follow its regular progress. ART. XXVI.-The Evidence at large, as laid before the Committee of the House of Commons, respecting Dr. Jenner's Discovery of Vaccine Inoculation; together with the Debate which followed; and some Observations on the contravening Evidence, &c. By the Rev. G. C. JENNER. 8vo. pp. 220. THE greatest part of the contents of this volume are already pretty well known to the public, yet they are in themselves so valuable, that we fully acquiesce in the propriety of their being published in their present form. The subject to which they refer is of such infinite moment, the body of evidence adduced is so complete, and of such high respectability, and the whole is brought forwards in so impressive a manner, that the public mind cannot be too frequently or too earnestly directed to it. The fairness with which the committee acted, in receiving the testimony of those persons who were known to be adverse to vaccination, certainly tends to increase the effect produced by the perusal of the whole; their objections, when compared with the authority of the opposite opinion, appear doubly insignificant. Even Dr. Moseley himself, when deprived of the opportunity of displaying his low humour and coarse invective, is reduced to the slender hold of hearsay report, and lost his recollection of names and facts just at the very time when it might have been the most successfully exercised. At the end of the work we have some 'observations upon the contravening evi dence.' They relate to some cases of s E supposed failure of cow-pox, in preserving the system against the small-pox, and to the title which Dr. Jenner claims of being the discoverer of the vaccine inoculation. On the first of these points we have already entered at large in some of the preceding articles; with respect to the second, although we apprehend that there is now but one opinion on the subject, yet it is curious to observe what was brought forwards on the opposite side of the question, however irrelevant or unimportant. It is indeed an undoubted fact, that the prophylactic power of cow-pox was known to some individuals, both in and out of the profession, and that in a few instances, persons had the disease intentionally communicated to them, by handling the teats of the infected cow, or even by being inoculated with matter taken directly from the animal. Beyond this, however, the subject does not appear to have advanced, so that whether we ascribe it to the greater zeal or superior sagacity of Dr. Jenner, we are decidedly of opinion, that to him alone are we indebted for the advantage which the world has derived from the discovery. In our opi nion few discoveries have been made in any age, where the claim to originality has been more clearly ascertained, and the value of the discovery itself more decidedly established. After delivering these sentiments, we may perhaps be thought somewhat inconsistent or capricious if we, after all, express our doubt about the propriety of voting Dr. Jenner a parliamentary reward. We think it a dangerous precedent, one which may eventually injure the cause of science, and lead to a new source of public profusion. We are fully persuaded that Dr Jenner himself neither wished, nor expected, any pecuniary emolument, when he prosecuted his experi ments on vaccination. By holding up such inducements, we derogate from the dignity and independance of science, and raise up a set of pretenders, who will influence the judgment of the public, not in proportion to their merit, but their assurance. Had the practice of voting pecuniary rewards been confined to Dr. Jenner, these remarks might have appeared unnecessary, but we cannot avoid offering them, when we behold a sum of money presented to a man for practising a process which he did not invent, and the operation of which it appears he did not understand. ART. XXVII.-An Answer to Dr. Moseley, containing a Defence of Vaccination. Bu JOHN RING, Member of the Royal College of Surgeons in London, and of the Medical Societies of London and Paris. 8vo. pp. 300. DR. MOSELEY's attack upon vaccination has called forth the pen of its zealous and powerful advocate Mr. Ring. In repelling the assaults of his adversary, our author frequently employs the same species of sarcastic humour which we reprobated when reviewing Dr. Moseley's treatise; we cannot give it our approbation in the work before us, but we think Mr. Ring is less reprehensible than the original aggressor. We soon, however, come to a more valuable part of the work, when the author very happily points out the resemblance between the hostility which now prevails against the cow-pox, and that which was formerly manifested against the small-pox inoculation when it was first proposed to the public. It appears that sir Richard Blackmore was the champion on that occasion, and that he was aided by Tanner, a surgeon of St. Thomas's hospital, and a clergyman of the name of Massey. Sir Richard considers the idea of inoculation proving a preventative of the natural small-pox as contrary to experience and observation, and brings forward instances of its failure. But the zeal of the knight was far outstript by that of the divine; after endeavouring to prove that the small-pox was the disease with which Job was afflicted, and that he was inoculated by the devil, he remarks that (variolous) inoculation is derived from the country where Job was supposed to have lived, "He maintains, that diseases are sent by Providence, for the trial of our faith, and the punishment of our sins; and thinks they are hung over our heads in terrorem. To illus trate this point, he reminds lus audience, that some people are honest for fear of a gaol; some are chaste for fear of infection; some are just for fear of shame, and some are rele gious for fear of going to hell. "He therefore considers the inoculation of the small-pox, with a view to alleviate or exterminate the disorder, as a diabolical ope ration. He allows it is one of the fundamental laws of nature, to promote the good of mankind; but he doubts whether life is a good or an evil. If it be a good, he maintains, that it is as little beholden to this practice for its preservation, as to any other invention what ever." He does not, however, rest his obiec tions solely upon theological arguments: he boldly asserts, "that the confessed miscarriages in this new method are more than have happened in the ordinary way," and he openly accuses those physicians of falsehood and deceit who endeavoured to inculcate the contrary opinion. These were not the only opposers of the variolous inoculation, nor did all hostility cease at so early a period. About the middle of the last century it was strenu ously decried by Dr. Deering of Nottingham, and Dr. Dod, one of the physicians to St. Bartholomew's hospital, upon the principle of its not affording security against the casual disease. The practice experienced a similar opposition in America, as appears from a pamphlet published at Boston in 1722. The author states that many persons have fallen victims to the practice, and observes that in case an action for felony was brought against an inoculator, the testimonies that might be adduced "would be worth his neck in any court of justice." These are curious historical documents, their appli cation to the present case is striking, and they should induce those who oppose vaccination to be very sure upon what grounds their opinions are rested. In Dr. Moseley's treatise a good deal of stress is laid upon a case related by Dr. John Sims, of a person, who having twice had the casual cow-pox, afterwards caught the small-pox. It appears, however, that Dr. Sims did not regard this case as any objection to the practice of vaccination; he conceived it probable that the individual might have been affected with some other of the diseases to which cows are subject, and brings forward his information, not to discourage vaccination, but to make people cautious respecting the nature of the matter which they procure from the cow. Mr. Ring refers to a gentleman who was an early and violent opposer of the cow-pox, and who appears unquestionably to have been influenced by the most sinister motives, and to have used all kinds of arts to accomplish his ends. Our medical readers will probably recollect the circumstances, as well as the melancholy termination of his career. The author has delicately permitted his name to rest in oblivion, we shall follow his example. Mr. Ring next makes some remarks upon the testimonies which have been received in favour of the vaccine inoculation, from all quarters of the civilized world. He gives an abstract of the evidence presented to the house of commons, and lays before us a plan proposed by the government of France for promoting vaccination in that country. He regrets that no similar measure has been taken by the British government, a sentiment in which we cannot altogether acquiesce with him. We think the less government interfere in such matters the better; they gave their complete sanction to vaccination when they voted the reward to Dr. Jenner. A subsequent transaction has, in our opinion, demonstrated the danger of permitting parliament to employ the public purse in rewarding supposed inventions in medical science. A letter from Dr. Friese of Silesia, giving an account of the estimation in which the cow-pox is held in that country, and the judicious "address from a country clergyman to his parishioners," written by the Rev. Mr. Warren, conclude this part of the subject. Some valuable remarks next occur upon Mr. Goldson's pamphlet, a subject which has already fallen under our discussion, and upon the supposed failure of vaccination in the child of Mr. Bowen, a case upon which Dr. Moseley places much of the force of his arguments. This gentleman inoculated the child with smallpox matter after vaccination: a pustule was formed on the inoculated part attended with some degree of fever; it proceeded to maturation, but some other pustules which appeared on different parts of the body did not maturate; from the pustule on the arm matter was taken which communicated the disease to other children. Upon these circumstances Mr. Ring remarks, "It is well known, and has been proved by examples, that a local pustule may be had the small-pox, as well as in those who produced by inoculation in those who have have had the cow-pox; and that constitutional symptoms, together with a rash, or miliary eruption, are also sometimes produced in such a case. As to a single pustule, capable of yielding matter, it may also easily be excited in consequence of the application of virus by the nails of the patients, either immediately time during the continuance of the pustule; after the operation, or at any subsequent and this is no uncommon occurrence, either in variolous or vaccine inoculation. "When any person is inoculated for the small-pox, who has neither had the small-pox nor the cow-pock, a pustulous eruption takes place in the neighbourhood of the primary pustule; and the whole constitute a cluster of fluent. But in the present instance there was small-pocks, which become more or less cononly a solitary pustule in the place of inoculation; as in those who are put to the test atter they have had the sinall-pox." This explanation is, we apprehend, perfectly fair, and indeed it appears to have operated so far upon the mind of Mr. Bowen, that he was himself convinced of the fallacy of his objections, and with true candour retracted his erroneous opinions. It appears indeed upon reviewing the instances of the supposed failure of the cow-pox, that in all of them, except the case in Fullwood's-rents, there was either some irregularity about the symptoms, or some obscurity about the facts, which fully justify us in withholding our assent to the conclusion, that the constitutional small-pox has occurred after the vaccine disease had gone through its regular process. As one instance of this kind is, however, acknowledged to have occurred, it is natural to inquire, whether the casual small-pox ever occurred twice in the same subject, or whether the disease was ever caught after the variolous inoculation? The occurrence is confessedly so rare, that |