HC Deb 17 May 1909 vol 5 cc199-200W

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that the vaccination officer for New Cleethorpes has served Mr. W. Truman, of 23, Bancroft-street, New Cleethorpes, with a notice of default, threatening him with prosecution under the Vaccination Acts unless he consents to the vaccination of his son a boy 12 years of age; will he say whether the unvaccinated condition of the child was discovered through the medical inspection at the school; and whether steps will be taken to prevent vaccination officers prosecuting parents of unvaccinated children in cases where such parents had not the opportunity of making a statutory declaration of conscientious objection to vaccination as is now the case with objectors to the practice?


A notice does not appear to have been served upon Mr. Truman, but I understand there was another case in which the vaccination officer, finding that a boy of 12 had not been vaccinated, served the parent with a notice, and perhaps this is the case to which my hon. Friend refers. The fact that the boy had not been vaccinated was discovered from the records in the possession of the vaccination officer, and not through any medical inspection at the school. It was open to the parent within a limited period after the passing of the Vaccination Act, 1898, to apply for a certificate of conscientious objection if he believed that vaccination would be prejudicial to the health of the boy. I cannot interfere with the operation of the law which makes him liable to proceedings if he did not obtain such a certificate.