9

I.—la

EXHIBIT B. Sib, — No. 1, Willis Street, Wellington, 24th February, 1898. I have the honour to lay before you the following case : The parents of a child some fourteen months old, which, as Public Vaccinator, I vaccinated last October, have commenced an action for damages against me, alleging that the child has developed syphilis through vaccination. This child was inoculated with calf-lymph supplied to me by the Government. I have, at considerable expense, had the parents and their children most carefully examined by Dr. Cleghorn, of Blenheim, Dr. Fyffe and Dr. Faulke, of Wellington. Their joint signed report is in my hands, and discloses the presence of syphilis in the mother as well as in her infant of four months old, but no diagnostic symptoms in the one claimed to be infected. This woman has been a common prostitute, and was delivered of her first child (deceased) in the Alexandra Home. Her own father is the reputed father of the child. The paternity of the second child (the one alleged to have vaccino-syphilis) is doubtful. This is a most serious matter. The lymph used was supplied by the Government. lam a Government servant by virtue of my appointment. It is a most foul slander, not only against myself but against the department. I respectfully submit that the onus of defending rests with the Government, and I have the honour to appeal to you accordingly. I have, &c, The Honourable the Colonial Secretary. W. C. Fitzgerald.

EXHIBIT C. Wβ, the undersigned, have examined all the children in the accompanying list. We found them all in perfect health, with a complete absence of all signs of syphilis, hereditary or acquired. Those in charge, in every case, stated that the children had enjoyed excellent health both before and since vaccination. Every mark was a normal vaccinal cicatrix. In nearly every case the mother voluntarily expressed her satisfaction with the vaccination, and in no case was there any complaint. Ernest Eawson, M.E.C.S.E., &c. Herbert Faulke, F.E.C.S.Ed. Wellington, 27th June, 1898. Alfred G. Bowater, Annie Crawford, Lavin Andrew, Robert W. Carpenter, Edith Spencer, W. C. Spencer, Hester Petherick, N. 0. Dwyer, A. E. Shackelton, C. Bradley, S. Bradley, Mudgway, Annie Jane Fisher.

EXHIBIT D. We, the undersigned duly qualified medical men, beg to state that we have carefully examined the child Eoberts, her sister, — Eoberts, the mother, Mrs. Roberts, and the father, — Eoberts. We find that at the present time, with regard to the child, — Eoberts, said to be infected with syphilis, that there are no symptoms which show that the child has been infected with that disease. There is no induration about the scar of the vaccination-mark; there is no rash, and no signs of mucous tubercles about the child. The child has an enlarged gland in the left axilla, where the vaccination■scar is ; also in both posterior triangles of the neck enlarged glands are present. Glands of the same kind are present in both groins. No other signs of syphilis are present. In the second child, not said to be infected by syphilis, the same enlarged glands are present, and, in addition, a red desquamating rash round the anus. As regards the mother, her throat is very suspicious of previous syphilitic infection. It is scarred in two or three places as though she had suffered from specific ulceration. She denies herself ever having had the disease to her knowledge. We may point out that, before her marriage, on her own evidence she had an illegitimate child, which died. The father of the child said to be infected shows no signs of syphilis. The history of the disease is not exactly compatible with that of syphilis. The ordinary course of vaccino-syphilis is that a sore forms, heals, and then breaks down again. In this case the sore never healed, and the eruption was present whilst the sore was discharging. This is unusual. This set of symptoms is more compatible with septicaemia than with syphilis. However, Dr. Ewart informs us that the child had mucous plaques upon its tongue. If this be so, it is distinctive of syphilis, and it must be assumed that the child had the disease. But, even supposing that the child had contracted the disease and at the point of vaccination, it is not possible for any one to say that the poison necessarily was due to the vaccination. Taking into consideration the condition of the mother's throat, which points strongly to syphilitic infection, it is very possible that she may have secondarily infected the child. The saliva of a person who has suffered with syphilis "is infective for a considerable period, and there is nothing to show that the child was not infected in this way. In addition to the above evidence, considering the condition of the other child, it is possible that the secondary infection may have come from it. We think it well that this child said to be infected should be seen from time to time, that its symptoms may be watched. One symptom is absent from this case which is common in scars left by syphilis, and that is that such a scar is pigmented. There is no pigmentation in the vaccination-scar on this child. George Cleghobn. Hebbert Faulke. 17th February, 1898. Wμ. Kington Fyffe.

EXHIBIT E. My Dbak Mb. Fitzgerald,— Wellington, 17th June, 1898. I have been thinking a great deal about this case of alleged " unskilful treatment " with which you are threatened, but more especially since you told me that your solicitors had set the case down on the Court-list instead of the prosecuting counsel. Ido not question the wisdom of 2—l. lα.