View report page

87
on a person once for all if he omitted to do that which, in the
view of the Legislature, public health and safety required, but
that a penalty might be imposed so long as disobedience to its
enactments continued. I, therefore, hold that the powers given by
section 31 are not confined to one order and one conviction, but
that the proceedings may be repeated toties quoties so long as
disobedience continues.'
There is no doubt that those magistrates who, in the
exercise of their discretion, made repeated orders in respect of the
same child, were, in the opinion of many, mistaken, and harsh
results often followed, and the evidence of this, which was
brought before them, doubtless led to the recommendation in the
Report (dated 23rd May, 1871) of the Select Committee of the
House of Commons on the Vaccination Act (1867), that no more
than two penalties or one full penalty should be imposed in
respect of the same child.
The Act of 1867 remained unaffected by subsequent
legislation until the 1st January, 1872, when the Vaccination
Act, 1871, came into force.
Meanwhile a Select Committee had been appointed to
inquire into the working of the Act of 1867, and this Act of 1871
was introduced into the House of Commons by Mr. Forster, its
chairman. The Act was entitled ' an Act to amend the Vaccination
Act, 1867,' and was to be construed as one with it.
A change of importance was made by the fifth section
which rendered the appointment and payment of officers to
prosecute and to enforce the provisions of the Acts obligatory
upon the Guardians, whereas it had theretofore been permissive
only. These officers were to be called Vaccination Officers.
They were to perform all the duties imposed on the Registrars by
the principal Act, except giving the notices to the parents within
seven days of the registration of the births under section 15 of the
Act of 1867.