HC Deb 20 February 1877 vol 232 cc737-8
MR. BARRAN

asked the President of the Local Government Board, If his attention has been called to an inquest held in Leeds, on Monday 12th February, upon a child, infant daughter of William Perkins, alleged to have died from vaccination, the medical certificate being, primary cause vaccination; and to statements that erysipelas frequently follows vaccination, thereby causing the death of many children; and, whether he intends to take steps to inquire into these cases, with a view to giving security to parents, who are compelled by Law to have their children vaccinated?

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

, in reply, said, his attention had been called to the death of a child at Leeds, which was alleged to have been due to vaccination, and he had caused inquiries to be made on the subject. The vaccination, it appeared, had been performed, not by a public officer, but by a private practitioner, and at the inquest which was held the jury found that the child had died from erysipelas, but did not agree as to how the erysipelas had been caused. The child after vaccination had received an injury which accounted for the difference of opinion among the jury. He might observe that the lymph with which the child had been vaccinated had been used in other cases without prejudicial results. When cases of this kind occurred it was his invariable practice to institute an inquiry into the circumstances attending them. He had received a report on the Gainsborough case, to which he referred the other day, and had laid it on the Table. He believed it would illustrate similar cases, and be useful in showing how bad aftereffects sometimes followed vaccination as they did other operations.