From this child's arm matter was taken and transferred
to that of J. Barge, a boy of seven years old. He sickened
on the 8th day, went through the disease with the usual
slight symptoms, and without any inflammation on the arm
beyond the common efflorescence surrounding the pustule,
an appearance so often seen in inoculated Small-pox.
After the many fruitless attempts to give the Small-pox to
those who had had the Cow-pox, it did not appear necessary,
nor was it convenient to me, to inoculate the whole of
those who had been the subjects of these late trials; yet I
thought it right to see the effects of variolous matter on
some of them, particularly William Summers, the first of
these patients who had been infected with matter taken
from the cow. He was therefore inoculated with variolous
matter from a fresh pustule; but, as in the preceding
Cases, the system did not feel the effects of it in the
smallest degree. I had an opportunity also of having this boy
and William Pead inoculated by my Nephew, Mr. Henry
Jenner, whose report to me is as follows: "I have inoculated
Pead and Barge, two of the boys whom you lately infected
with the Cow-pox. On the 2d day the incisions were inflamed
and there was a pale inflammatory stain around them.
On the 3d day these appearances were still increasing and their
arms itched considerably. On the 4th day, the inflammation
was evidently subsiding, and on the 6th it was scarcely
perceptible. No symptom of indisposition followed.
To convince myself that the variolous matter made use
of was in a perfect state, I at the same time inoculated a
patient with some of it who never had gone through the
Cow-pox, and it produced the Small-pox in the usual
regular manner."
These experiments afforded me much satisfaction, they
proved that the matter in passing from one human subject to
another, through five gradations, lost none of its original
properties, J. Barge being the fifth who received the infection
successively from William Summers, the boy to whom
it was communicated from the cow.
I shall now conclude this Inquiry with some
general observations on the subject and on
some others which are interwoven with it.
Although I presume it may be unnecessary to
produce further testimony in support of my assertion
"that the Cow-pox protects the human constitution
from the infection of the Small-pox," yet
it affords me considerable satisfaction to say, that
Lord Somerville, the President of the Board of
Agriculture, to whom this paper was shewn by
Sir Joseph Banks, has found upon inquiry that the
statements were confirmed by the concuring testimony
of Mr. Dolland, a surgeon, who resides in
a dairy country remote from this, in which these
observations were made. With respect to the
opinion adduced "that the source of the infection
is a peculiar morbid matter arising in the horse,"
although I have not been able to prove it from
actual experiments conducted immediately under
my own eye, yet the evidence I have adduced
appears sufficient to establish it.
They who are not in the habit of conducting
experiments may not be aware of the coincidence
of circumstances necessary for their being managed
so as to prove perfectly decisive; nor how often men
engaged in professional pursuits are liable to interruptions
which disappoint them almost at the
instant of their being accomplished: however,
I feel no room for hesitation respecting the common
origin of the disease, being well convinced
that it never appears among the cows (except it
can be traced to a cow introduced among the
general herd which has been previously infected,
or to an infected servant), unless they have been
milked by some one who, at the same time, has
the care of a horse affected with diseased heels.
The spring of the year 1797, which I intended
particularly to have devoted to the completion of
this investigation, proved, from its dryness, remarkably
adverse to my wishes; for it frequently
happens, while the farmers' horses are exposed to
the cold rains which fall at that season that their
heels become diseased, and no Cow-pox then
appeared in the neighbourhood.
The active quality of the virus from the horses'
heels is greatly increased after it has acted on the
nipples of the cow, as it rarely happens that the
horse affects his dresser with sores, and as rarely
that a milk-maid escapes the infection when she
milks infected cows. It is most active at the
commencement of the disease, even before it has
acquired a pus-like appearance; indeed I am not
confident whether this property in the matter does
not entirely cease as soon as it is secreted in the
form of pus. I am induced to think it does
cease[1], and that it is the thin darkish-looking
fluid only, oozing from the newly-formed cracks
in the heels, similar to what sometimes appears
from erysipelatous blisters, which gives the disease.
Nor am I certain that the nipples of the cows are
at all times in a state to receive the infection. The
appearance of the disease in the spring and the
early part of the summer, when they are disposed
to be affected with spontaneous eruptions so much
more frequently than at other seasons, induces me
to think, that the virus from the horse must be
received upon them when they are in this state, in
order to produce effects: experiments, however,
must determine these points. But it is clear that
when the Cow-pox virus is once generated, that
the cows cannot resist the contagion, in whatever
state their nipples may chance to be, if they are
milked with an infected hand.
Whether the matter, either from the cow or the
horse will affect the sound skin of the human
body, I cannot positively determine; probably
it will not, unless on those parts where the cuticle
is extremely thin, as on the lips for example.
I have known an instance of a poor girl who
produced an ulceration on her lip by frequently
holding her finger to her mouth to cool the raging
of a Cow-pox sore by blowing upon it. The
hands of the farmers' servants here, from the
nature of their employments, are constantly exposed
to those injuries which occasion abrasions
of the cuticle, to punctures from thorns and such
like accidents; so that they are always in a state
to feel the consequences of exposure to infectious
matter.
It is singular to observe that the Cow-pox virus,
although it renders the constitution unsusceptible
of the variolous, should, nevertheless, leave it
unchanged with respect to its own action. I have
already produced an instance[2] to point out this,
and shall now corroborate it with another.
Elizabeth Wynne, who had the Cow-pox in the
year 1759, was inoculated with variolous matter,
without effect, in the year 1797, and again caught
the Cow-pox in the year 1798. When I saw her,
which was on the 8th day after she received the
infection, I found her affected with general lassitude,
shiverings, alternating with heat, coldness
of the extremities, and a quick and irregular
pulse. These symptoms were preceded by a pain
in the axilla. On her hand was one large pustulous
sore, which resembled that delinated in Plate
No. 1.
It is curious also to observe, that the virus,
which with respect to its effects is undetermined
and uncertain previously to its passing from the
horse through the medium of the cow, should then
not only become more active, but should invariably
and completely possess those specific properties
which induce in the human constitution
symptoms similar to those of the variolous fever,
and effect in it that peculiar change which for
ever renders it unsusceptible of the variolous contagion.
May it not, then, be reasonably conjectured, that
the source of the Small-pox is morbid matter of a
peculiar kind, generated by a disease in the horse,
and that accidental circumstances may have again
and again arisen, still working new changes upon
it, until it has acquired the contagious and malignant
form under which we now commonly see it
making its devastations amongst us? And, from a
consideration of the change which the infectious
matter undergoes from producing a disease on the
cow, may we not conceive that many contagious
diseases, now prevalent among us, may owe their
present appearance not to a simple, but to a compound
origin? For example, is it difficult to
imagine that the measles, the scarlet fever, and the
ulcerous sore throat with a spotted skin, have all
sprung from the same source, assuming some
variety in their forms according to the nature of
their new combinations? The same question will
apply respecting the origin of many other contagious
diseases, which bear a strong analogy to each
other.
There are certainly more forms than one,
without considering the common variation between
the confluent and distinct, in which the
Small-pox appears in what is called the natural
way.–About seven years ago a species of Small-pox
spread through many of the towns and
villages of this part of Gloucestershire: it was
of so mild a nature, that a fatal instance was
scarcely ever heard of, and consequently so little
dreaded by the lower orders of the community,
that they scrupled not to hold the same intercourse
with each other as if no infectious disease had been
present among them. I never saw nor heard of
an instance of its being confluent. The most
accurate manner, perhaps, in which I can convey
an idea of it is, by saying, that had fifty individuals
been taken promiscuously and infected
by exposure to this contagion, they would have
had as mild and light a disease as if they had
been inoculated with variolous matter in the
usual way. The harmless manner in which
it shewed itself could not arise from any peculiarity
either in the season or the weather, for I
watched its progress upwards of a year without
perceiving any variation in its general appearance.
I consider it then as a variety of the Small-pox[3].
In some of the preceding cases I have noticed
the attention that was paid to the state of the
variolous matter previous to the experiment of
inserting it into the arms of those who had gone
through the Cow-pox. This I conceived to be
of great importance in conducting these experiments,
and were it always properly attended to by
those who inoculate for the Small-pox, it might
prevent much subsequent mischief and confusion.
With the view of enforcing so necessary a precaution,
I shall take the liberty of digressing so
far as to point out some unpleasant facts, relative
to mismanagement in this particular, which
have fallen under my own observation.
A Medical Gentleman (now no more), who
for many years inoculated in this neighbourhood,
frequently preserved the variolous matter intended
for his use, on a piece of lint or cotton, which, in
its fluid state was put into a vial, corked, and
conveyed into a warm pocket; a situation certainly
favourable for speedily producing putrefaction
in it. In this state (not unfrequently after
it had been taken several days from the pustules)
it was inserted into the arms of his patients, and
brought on inflammation of the incised parts,
swellings of the axillary glands, fever, and sometimes
eruptions. But what was this disease? Certainly
not the Small-pox; for the matter having
from putrefaction lost, or suffered a derangement
in its specific properties, was no longer capable
of producing that malady, those who had been
inoculated in this manner being as much subject
to the contagion of the Small-pox, as if
they had never been under the influence of this
artificial disease; and many, unfortunately, fell
victims to it, who thought themselves in perfect
security. The same unfortunate circumstance of
giving a disease, supposed to be the Small-pox,
with inefficaceous variolous matter, having occurred
under the direction of some other practitioners
within my knowledge, and probably from the same
incautious method of securing the variolous matter,
I avail myself of this opportunity of mentioning
what I conceive to be of great importance;
and, as a further cautionary hint, I shall again
digress so far as to add another observation on the
subject of Inoculation.
Whether it be yet ascertained by experiment,
that the quantity of variolous matter inserted into
the skin makes any difference with respect to the
subsequent mildness or violence of the disease, I
know not; but I have the strongest reason for
supposing that is either the punctures or incisions
be made so deep as to go through it, and wound
the adipose membrane, that the risk of bringing
on a violent disease is greatly increased. I have
known an inoculator, whose practice was "to
cut deep enough (to use his own expression) to see
a bit of fat," and there to lodge the matter. The
great number of bad Cases, independent of inflammations
and abscesses on the arms, and the fatality
which attended this practice was almost inconceivable;
and I cannot account for it on any
other principle than that of the matter being placed
in this situation instead of the skin.
It was the practice of another, whom I well
remember, to pinch up a small portion of the skin
on the arms of his patients and to pass through it
a needle, with a thread attached to it previously
dipped in variolous matter. The thread was
lodged in the perforated part, and consequently
left in contact with the cellular membrane. This
practice was attended with the same ill success as
the former. Although it is very improbable that
any one would now inoculate in this rude way by
design, yet these observations may tend to place a
double guard over the lancet, when infants, whose
skins are comparatively so very thin, fall under
the care of the inoculator.
A very respectable friend of mine, Dr. Hardwicke,
of Sodbury in this county, inoculated great
numbers of patients previous to the introduction
of the more modern method by Sutton, and with
such success, that a fatal instance occurred as
rarely as since that method has been adopted. It
was the doctor's practice to make as slight an incision
as possible upon the skin, and there to lodge
a thread saturated with the variolous matter.
When his patients became indisposed, agreeably
to the custom then prevailing, they were directed
to go to bed and were kept moderately warm. Is
it not probable then, that the success of the modern
practice may depend more upon the method of
invariably depositing the virus in or upon the skin,
than on the subsequent treatment of the disease?
I do not mean to insinuate that exposure to cool
air, and suffering the patient to drink cold water
when hot and thirsty, may not moderate the eruptive
symptoms and lessen the number of pustules;
yet, to repeat my former observation, I cannot
account for the uninterrupted success, or nearly so,
of one practitioner, and the wretched state of the
patients under the care of another, where, in both
instances, the general treatment did not differ
essentially, without conceiving it to arise from the
different modes of inserting the matter for the
purpose of producing the disease. As it is not the
identical matter inserted which is absorbed into the
constitution, but that which is, by some peculiar
process in the animal economy, generated by it,
is it not probable that different parts of the human
body may prepare or modify the virus differently?
Although the skin, for example, adipose membrane,
or mucous membranes are all capable of
producing the variolous virus by the stimulus given
by the particles originally deposited upon them,
yet I am induced to conceive that each of these
parts is capable of producing some variation in
the qualities of the matter previous to its affecting
the constitution. What else can constitute the
difference between the Small-pox when communicated
casually or in what has been termed the
natural way, or when brought on artificially
through the medium of the skin? After all, are
the variolous particles, possessing their true specific
and contagious principles, ever taken up and conveyed
by the lymphatics unchanged into the blood
vessels? I imagine not. Were this the case,
should we not find the blood sufficiently loaded
with them in some stages of the Small-pox to communicate
the disease by inserting it under the
cuticle, or by spreading it on the surface of an
ulcer? Yet experiments have determined the impracticability
of its being given in this way; although
it has been proved that variolous matter
when much diluted with water, and applied to the
skin in the usual manner, will produce the disease.
But it would be digressing beyond a
proper boundary, to go minutely into this subject
here.
At what period the Cow-pox was first noticed
here is not upon record. Our oldest farmers were
not unacquainted with it in their earliest days,
when it appeared among their farms without any
deviation from the phænomena which it now exhibits.
Its connection with the Small-pox seems
to have been unknown to them. Probably the
general introduction of inoculation first occasioned
the discovery.
Its rise in this country may not have been of
very remote date, as the practice of milking cows
might formerly have been in the hands of women
only; which I believe is the case now in some
other dairy countries, and, consequently that the
cows might not in former times have been exposed
to the contagious matter brought by the men servants
from the heels of horses[4]. Indeed a knowledge
of the source of the infection is new in the
minds of most of the farmers in this neighbourhood,
but it has at length produced good consequences;
and it seems probable from the precautions
they are now disposed to adopt, that the
appearance of the Cow-pox here may either be
entirely extinguished or become extremely rare.
Should it be asked whether this investigation is
a matter of mere curiosity, or whether it tends to
any beneficial purpose? I should answer, that
notwithstanding the happy effects of Inoculation,
with all the improvements which the practice has
received since its first introduction into this
country, it not very unfrequently produces deformity
of the skin, and sometimes, under the best
management, proves fatal.
These circumstances must naturally create in
every instance some degree of painful solicitude
for its consequences. But as I have never known
fatal effects arise from the Cow-pox, even when
impressed in the most unfavourable manner, producing
extensive inflammations and suppurations
on the hands; and as it clearly appears that this
disease leaves the constitution in a state of perfect
security from the infection of the Small-pox, may
we not infer that a mode of Inoculation may be
introduced preferable to that at present adopted,
especially among those families, which, from
previous circumstances we may judge to be predisposed
to have the disease unfavourably? It is an
excess in the number of pustules which we chiefly
dread in the Small-pox; but, in the Cow-pox, no
pustules appear, nor does it seem possible for the
contagious matter to produce the disease from
effluvia, or by any other means than contact, and
that probably not simply between the virus and
the cuticle; so that a single individual in a family
might at any time receive it without the risk of
infecting the rest, or of spreading a distemper that
fills a country with terror. Several instances have
come under my observation which justify the
assertion that the disease cannot be propagated by
effluvia. The first boy whom I inoculated with
the matter of Cow-pox, slept in a bed, while the
experiment was going forward, with two children
who never had gone through either that disease or
the Small-pox, without infecting either of them.
A young woman who had the Cow-pox to a
great extent, several sores which maturated having
appeared on the hands and wrists, slept in the same
bed with a fellow-dairy maid who never had been
infected with either the Cow-pox or the Small-pox,
but no indisposition followed.
Another instance has occurred of a young
woman on whose hands were several large suppurations
from the Cow-pox, who was at the same
time a daily nurse to an infant, but the complaint
was not communicated to the child.
In some other points of view, the inoculation
of this disease appears preferable to the variolous
inoculation.
In constitutions predisposed to scrophula, how
frequently we see the inoculated Small-pox, rouse
into activity that distressful malady. This circumstance
does not seem to depend on the manner in
which the distemper has shewn itself, for it has as
frequently happened among those who have had it
mildly, as when it has appeared in the contrary way.
There are many, who from some peculiarity in
the habit resist the common effects of variolous
matter inserted into the skin, and who are in consequence
haunted through life with the distressing
idea of being insecure from subsequent infection.
A ready mode of dissipating anxiety originating
from such a cause must now appear obvious. And,
as we have seen that the constitution may at any
time be made to feel the febrile attack of Cow-pox,
might it not, in many chronic diseases be
introduced into the system, with the probability
of affording relief, upon well-known physiological
principles?
Although I say the system may at any time be
made to feel the febrile attack of Cow-pox, yet I
have a single instance before me where the virus
acted locally only, but it is not in the least probable
that the same person would resist the action
both of the Cow-pox virus and the variolous.
Elizabeth Sarsenet lived as a dairy maid at Newpark
farm, in this parish. All the cows and the servants
employed in milking had the Cow-pox; but
this woman, though she had several sores upon
her fingers, felt no tumors in the axillæ, nor any
general indisposition. On being afterwards casually
exposed to variolous infection, she had the
Small-pox in a mild way.–Hannah Pick, another
of the dairy maids who was a fellow-servant with
Elizabeth Sarsenet when the distemper broke out
at the farm was, at the same time infected; but
this young woman had not only sores upon her
hands, but felt herself also much indisposed for a
day or two. After this, I made several attempts
to give her the Small-pox by inoculation, but
they all proved fruitless. From the former Case
then we see that the animal economy is subject to
the same laws in one disease as the other.
The following Case which has very lately occurred
renders it highly probable that not only the
heels of the horse, but other parts of the body of
that animal, are capable of generating the virus
which produces the Cow-pox.
An extensive inflammation of the erysipelatous
kind, appeared without any apparent cause upon
the upper part of the thigh of a sucking colt, the
property of Mr. Millet, a farmer at Rockhampton,
a village near Berkeley. The inflammation continued
several weeks, and at length terminated in
the formation of three or four small abscesses. The
inflamed parts were fomented, and dressings were
applied by some of the same persons who were
employed in milking the cows. The number of
cows milked was twenty-four, and the whole of
them had the Cow-pox. The milkers, consisting
of the farmer's wife, a man and a maid servant,
were infected by the cows. The man servant had
previously gone through the Small-pox, and felt
but little of the Cow-pox. The servant maid had
some years before been infected with the Cow-pox,
and she also felt it now in a slight degree: But the
farmer's wife who never had gone through either
of these diseases, felt its effects very severely.
That the disease produced upon the cows by the
colt and from thence conveyed to those who
milked them was the true and not the spurious
Cow-pox[5], there can be scarcely any room for
suspicion; yet it would have been more completely
satisfactory, had the effects of variolous matter been
ascertained on the farmer's wife, but there was a
peculiarity in her situation which prevented my
making the experiment.
Thus far have I proceeded in an inquiry,
founded, as it must appear, on the basis of experiment;
in which, however, conjecture has
been occasionally admitted in order to present to
persons well situated for such discussions, objects
for a more minute investigation. In the mean
time I shall myself continue to prosecute this
inquiry, encouraged by the hope of its becoming
essentially beneficial to mankind.
FINIS.