View report page

177
At the same time, we fully recognise the importance of
achieving it as far as possible, and we should regard with favour
such changes as would render the amalgamation of the vaccination
and sanitary authorities feasible, or indeed any steps taken in that
direction, even although they should only partially effect the
object in view.
(E.) As to whether any alterations should be made in the arrangements
and proceedings for securing the performance of vaccinations, and, in
particular, in those provisions of the Vaccination Acts with respect
to prosecutions for non-compliance with the Law.
From the views which we have expressed on the subject of
vaccination, and on the absence of proof that any practical
alternative exists which could be relied on to accomplish the
same results if vaccination fell into disuse, it follows that we are
of opinion that the State ought to continue to promote the
vaccination of the people. Nor are we prepared to recommend
that the State should cease to require vaccination, and trust
entirely to a voluntary adoption of the practice.
It will be well at the outset of our discussion of this subject
to advert to the nature of the compulsion at present employed, to
secure compliance with the law requiring that children should be
vaccinated within a limited time after their birth.
When vaccination is spoken of as "compulsory," it is only
meant that, in case a child is not vaccinated as prescribed by law,
a pecuniary penalty is imposed which may be followed by distress
and imprisonment. The liability to this penalty no doubt in
many cases leads to vaccination, where it would otherwise be
neglected ; but, whether the penalty be enforced once or repeatedly
it does not compel vaccination in all cases. If a parent is content
to pay the penalty, his child remains unvaccinated; there have
been not a few cases in which repeated penalities have been thus
paid. Vaccination could be made really compulsory only by
taking the child from the parent and vaccinating it against his
L