I884.J 
Vaccination. 
129 
reasonable basis for it than it had yet had. This disease A la 
Ceely is moie frequently observable than the disease 
a la Jennei, especially in those times when the atmospheric 
conditions are such as to favour the spread of smallpox. 
So frequently does smallpox make its appearance very soon 
aftei vaccination, and so frequently does this smallpox con- 
current with cowpox (so called) prove fatal, that the 
Registrar-General was prevailed upon to lay down a rule 
that such deaths by smallpox as occurred within three weeks 
of the operation should be recorded as unvaccinated small- 
pox, while they were really the natural and scientific result 
of Ceelyism. 
Of the precise effects of the disease a la Cameron it is 
not possible to say very much, because it is not yet suffi- 
ciently patronised ; but it may be interesting to note the 
cause of its invention. The more or less constant recur- 
rence of unforeseen results in the course of operations, pre- 
sumably consequent upon the accession from the numerous 
bodies operated on of various poison germs to unite with 
and accompany the virus inserted, led to extended contro- 
versies, to which lack of space forbids further allusion, and 
eventually to the official recognition as vaccination of the 
practice of taking some virus from an animal which had 
developed sores, as a consequence of bad health and keeping 
this morbid virus in motion by constantly transferring it 
from calf to calf. This virus is said to be innocuous. But 
innocuous virus is a thing scarcely known to Science, and 
already complaints are being heard of unexpected results. 
A consideration of these circumstances will lead us readily 
to see that definition is not very easy. When we face the 
small sack of poisonous matter delicately named a vaccine 
vesicle, which is to provide us with the means of inflicting 
disease, what knowledge can we have of its contents ? How 
can we know what disease we are about to inflict by its aid ? 
Does it contain a germ of the horse poison accidentally 
communicated to the cow nearly a century ago ? Does it 
contain a germ of the smallpox virus inflicted on the cow 
thirty years ago ? Does it contain a germ, the outcome of 
the cow’s own internal disorder, said to be innocuous ? 
Further, does it contain a germ the outcome of some inter- 
nal disorder of the person on whom it is, or of the person 
or persons from whom the matter has been transmitted ? 
Do medical art and surgical science, either or both, supply 
us with any answers to these questions ? Whether they do 
or can is, however, of small importance as compared with 
the answer to the practical question, whether the multiplied 
