Vaccination Facts and Petitions
-resulted from the number of ill-health visitors who died at Hastings, most of whom lodged in the more fashionable parts of the town.
It may be further stated that since 1856, the comparatively low death-rate up to that time has been steadily decreasing in our own borough until now, February, 1889 (when this portion of Local History is being written) the Medical Officer of Health's returns show it to be only 12.1 per thousand, and the deaths from zymotic deceases, as 0.6 per thousand.
Vaccination.
During forty years of journalism the compiler of this History collected a vast number of reliable statistics and wrote a few hundreds of articles and paragraphs, shewing the non-prophylactic effects of vaccination, and the fatalities, diseases and other evils resulting from the system. He hopes to be able to reproduce the same in book form, that the public may have a permanent record of the erroneous statements and mystifying figures by which pro-vaccinators have been misled by well-paid Government officials and pecuniarily interested vaccine operators - the latter being school into the belief of vaccination safeguards and thus freed from the responsibility of personal examination or question of efficacy. Believing as I do, that the time will come when the wants will wonder that so expensive and disease-propogating(sic) rite should have endured so long a time. I repeat the hope of been{sic} able to reproduce what I have written in a separate volume. In the meantime, I here copy one of the numerous contributions to the local press by the late John Gibbs, Esq., of Maze Hill Cottage, St Leonards. To do so is the more appropriate as being coincidental with the largely signed petitions against vaccinations presented to the House of Commons from Hastings and St. Leonards, and which, as an historical fact it becomes me to notice. Mr. Gibbs, dating his letter, Feb. 18th, 1856. wrote:-Sir, - your last impression contains some extracts from the current quarterly return of the Register-General in which appears the following passage: 'Small-pox prevailed among the soldier at Canterbury, who had not been vaccinated.' As this extract insinuates a most pernicious error, perhaps you will allow me to supply the antidote from the same source - the Returns of the Registrar-General.
"Greenwich; Woolwich Arsenal. - At Royal Hospital, on 28th December a private in Royal Sappers and Miners, aged 18 years, smallpox (24 days), exhaustion, marks of vaccination indistinct.
In the same sub-district at Royal Ordnance Hospital, on 4th of Jan., a sergeant, Royal Artillery, aged 18 years, small-pox (18 days), after vaccination.
At Royal Ordnance Hospital, on 14th of January, 1856, a gunner, aged 19 years, small-pox (12 days), after vaccination.
At same Royal Ordnance Hospital, on 15th of January, a gunner, aged 26-
