On December 9, 1905, the Board of Education of Jackson Township, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, voted to admit students to school whether or not they could produce a certificate of vaccination. In their vote, they claimed that there was a conflict between the compulsory vaccination law and the compulsory education law, and until some higher authority ruled on which should prevail, they would only enforce the compulsory education law and not deny students admission to school on the basis of their unvaccinated status. The resolution that was passed was clearly in favor of the anti-vaccinationists who appeared to have a significant influence in the communities of the township. These anti-vaccinationists took to the press to express their views. Thus came letters from two communities in the township, Dietrich and Fisherville, both hotbeds of anti-vaccinationist sentiment.
_______________________________________________
From the Lykens Standard, January 12, 1906:
THE VACCINATION LAW
What Two Jackson Township Citizens Think of It
EDITOR STANDARD — We find in issue of recent date the plea of Dr. Samuel G. Dixon for vaccination. He says he can realize how a parent would oppose the vaccination of his child when the mind of such parent has been filled with blind prejudice and ignorant superstition, he even gives a long a plausible statement of the Prussian Empire, and of the Municipal Hospital, Philadelphia. We would not attempt to dispute those so-called facts. On the other hand we have no desire to go to distant points or foreign Empires to see if he is really telling the truth, nor do we desire to go to Cumberland County to se if the girl that died of tetanus really had a scratch on her hand, or if she died of vaccination. We have no desire to question these so-called facts — we have an abundance of proof at home. We can daily see the victim of the vaccination theory; we can show where people have been disabled for life; where falling or epileptic fits was the result; where people have been vaccinated seven years ago and not healed yet; we can show where one member of a family was vaccinated and contracted the dread disease small pox and the surrounding and attending family was not vaccinated and was not affected in the least. These are facts that we cannot and dare not deny.
Right in our midst the doctors have reported a fully-developed case of smallpox as the result of vaccination. Is this the prejudice that fills the mind of the anti-vaccinationists? Is this the law which we are expected to respect? Are we supposed to endanger the the lives and health of our little ones in order to uphold some one’s pet theory? Even if vaccination was a benefit to our Commonwealth, why should only school children be vaccinated and not teacher and parents as well? Dr. Dixon says the law reads that “no child shall be admitted to school without producing a certificate of successful vaccination, or of having had smallpox,” but Mr. Dixon forgets to state that the law includes only children where families are afflicted with the disease. If our health authorities can find anything to the Pennsylvania State Law that will prevent our children from attending public school in a healthy rural district, where there is no disease of any kind, they will confer a great favor by giving the information.
Simply tell us where to find it so that we may read it for ourselves. The office seekers and tired teacher refers us to Sec. 79, page 74, but does not care to read Sec. 78, page 73. Wes desire to impress upon the minds of the people of this Commonwealth that the time has come when we endeavor to cast off the yoke of oppression; we must declare ourselves independent of a rotten political organization and for in line on election day. This is where our only protection lies, and as long as we do not unite and establish a new form of government we, as well as our little ones, will be trampled under the tyrants; feet. Your neighbor may possibly ask, “where will we start?” Why, start right at home. Elect a school board that will not permit a teacher to order his or her children out of a school house when a stranger enters and takes out his purse, or the teacher that is flooding Harrisburg with letters. These are the teachers that are sowing the seed of corruption in the hearts of your little ones, and are pressing the yoke on the taxpayer. Then keep on — select good men for every office and you will find that indue time you will be a free man again, your children as well as you will no linger be the prey of corruption. In the time of the American Revolution, Benjamin Franklin addressed a letter to a member of the English Parliament in which he said, “Look upon you act with shame! You are murdering your people; your hands are stained with the blood of your relatives.” These tyrants had to be suppressed with shot and shell; but we can do it with the ballot box, if we start in time.
Respectfully,
Henry Swab, Fisherville, January 1, 1906.
_________________________________________
The second letter from the same newspaper, same date:
EDITORS STANDARD — I have read the decision of Dr. Samuel G. Dixon on the vaccination question, published in the last several issues of your valuable paper, in which he tells us what a good thing vaccination is, and how it has prevented small pox. We have had but one case of small pox in Jackson Township within my memory and that was in 1905. The afflicted on was the father of a family and was successfully vaccinated. No other member of the family was vaccinated, and although they were in the same house with him during his entire illness, none contracted the disease. I am not opposed to vaccination. If parents desire to have their children vaccinate, let them do so. If, however, on the other hand, they are opposed to vaccination, I don’t think they should be compelled to submit their children to the operation. The matter should rest with them, and with them alone. We are well aware that some children have died from the effects of vaccination, and others are cripples from the same cause. Admitting these facts, then, is it any wonder some parents oppose vaccination, and especially at this season of the year? I am sure if all the children in Jackson or in any other township, were at the point of death for the want of food, the State Board of Health would not come to their relief. They would say, “Why don’t their parents provide for them?” Why not, then, let their parents exercise their judgment for the best interests of their children in regard to vaccination? Dr. Dixon says that teachers have written to him saying that they desired to carry out the requirements of the law, but the directors instructed them to admit all children, whether they were vaccinated or not, thereby asking them to be lawbreakers.
We have a school law which says that every child must be sent to school at least 70 per centum of the school term. It does not say, provided, such child has been successfully vaccinated, or has had the small pox. When the teacher debars the the children from school he or she becomes a lawbreaker. Dr. Dixon says in his plea that the tramp passing along the highway may infect your child with small pox. Why not then have that tramp, the parents and the teachers and all adults vaccinated first to protect the children. The former are not the ones that roam over the country, and if there is such a thing as carrying the disease from one place to another, they are the ones most likely to do so, and not the child what only goes from its home to school and back. Some of our schools are closed, some are kept open with one, two, or three pupils. We never had any trouble with our schools until the passage of this obnoxious vaccination law, and rather than have the responsibility of depriving these children of attending school on that account, I would instruct the teachers to open the doors and admit all.
James Woland, Dietrich, January 2, 1906.
_____________________________________________
On January 12, 1906, the Lykens Standard reported in its news column from the community of Dietrich in Jackson Township:
Several of our township schools that were closed on account of the vaccination bugaboo, have reopened with but comparatively few children who are vaccinated.
_____________________________________________
Then, from the Lykens Standard, February 2, 1906, came another set of anti-vaccinationist letters:
EDITOR STANDARD — Since the people of this great Commonwealth have become so aroused and incensed of the vaccination question, the people of Jackson Township cannot refrain from discussing this question. We believe the vaccination question is dead, and that its remains will be buried in that newly-invented nine-foot grave, but even if this be true, our children not having certificates of successful vaccination are being robbed of that which money cannot buy — an education — and we think it is the duty of every father to defend his children. We do not believe vaccination is a preventative of small pox. It is cruel, barbarous, inhuman — a relic of filth, a tool used to extort money, and to submit our children to such torture is a sin in the sight of God. Who is responsible for this crime against our children? Does any sane person believe if the cause be a just one, Dr. Dixon would beg and plead to have it enforced? No, he would prosecute to the full extent of the law. He is defied time and again. If he has a law, why don’t he enforce it. In my opinion, school boards denying admission to the children not successfully vaccinated are responsible for the loss of instruction incurred thereby. The law says plainly that our children shall attend at least 70 per cent of the entire school term. They have no right to recognize any unwritten law, and if they respect their oath of office they will not uphold another man’s theory. The Governor in his recent message says, put the people’s will into law. He did not mean the will of a few political leaders who would sacrifice the lives of their neighbors for the almighty dollar. We believe he meant the will of the good people of the State. We can produce statements from prominent physicians of the various States of the Union emphatically denouncing vaccination. They say as its result they have treated such diseases as eczema, blood poison, scrofula, tetanus and even cancer and syphilis – the most dreaded diseases known to medical science. Not only the people of our township or county are aroused, but throughout the the entire State the people are awakening from their slumber. Indeed this is a trying ordeal — the political situation is paralyzed, and unless some of these laws are repealed, we fear the worst may come. For 25 years, I have been an advocate of the Republican Party, but today I stand aloof from all political corruption. We have too proud a country, too proud a flag to be infuriated by a few political leaders. Patriotism is the grandest thing on earth, for the love of country is the love of God, therefore we should try to suppress tyranny before it too fully invades the land of the free and the home of the brave. Russia is realizing today the horrors of a cruel master — the tyranny of a few high officials that had their own way too long, and thousands upon thousands of precious lives have been lost as a result of their cruelty. Dr. Dixon may think the people of this State regard vaccination as a hideous object, or as sure and sudden death. This is not the case, but they realize that they do not enjoy the liberty and independence they should.
Respectfully,
Henry Swab, Fisherville, January 22, 1906
________________________________________________
The second letter, also from the edition of the Lykens Standard, February 2, 1906:
Vaccination does not protect from small pox and it should have been dropped long ago. A vaccination sore is a poisonous sore, the symptom being septic fever, and instead of being a protection from small pox, weakens the system, thus making it more susceptible to the disease. We anti-vaccinationists have our rights, as America is a free country, and every man’s body is sacred to himself, and not to the State Board of Health. Then let us and our children die of small px and go where our God said there is rest; and let the advocates of vaccination die with diseases inculcated into the system by vaccination and go to their god Baal and see if he can give them rest. A vaccination sore may contain animal poison, as the virus may, perhaps been taken from an unhealthy animal and thus all diseases that the animal is subject to may be transmitted to the person vaccinated. The Board of Health must remember that the father is the unit of the home and that the members thereof are under his support and protection. His the preacher, the lawyer, the doctor, the health officer — he has to say what is to be done in the family and no the State Board of Health. I would like to know how in the name of common sense preachers can enter their churches and not warn their members about the wickedness that is sweeping over the State, carried on by a ring of politicians and office holders. Do they think they… [?]ing their duty? Reform and an honest government must be established, else everything will go to destruction. My Christian friends, open your eyes and act before it is too late! Something must be done regardless of party or politicians if our country is to be saved from ruin.
Respectfully,
Isaac P. Miller, Dietrich, January 22, 1906.
_________________________________________
The position taken by the Berrysburg Borough Council, at its February 19, 1906 meeting was reported in the Lykens Standard, February 23, 1906. The negative effects of denying a child an education were stated. The report also introduced another issue, i.e., whether the law of 1901 repealed certain parts of the 1895 law:
Many of our citizens, after comparing the law passed in 1895 in regard to the protection of the public health and the law of 1901, known as the compulsory educational school law, have come to the conclusion that there is now in operation no law that compels or requires a teacher of our public schools to keep out a child in good health that does not bring a certificate of successful vaccination but on the other hand the law now in force gives the directors the power to compel the teacher to admit every child in good health or to give up his position to some one who will obey the law.
— Section 12 of the law of 1895 requiring the principal or other person in charge of a public school to refuse the admission of any child to the school under his charge except upon presenting a certificate that the child has been successfully vaccinated. This law, including this 12th section so far as the public schools are concerned, was repealed by the law of 1901, which says that all other acts or parts of acts inconsistent herewith (that is with the compulsory educational laws) are hereby repealed.
— It seems to us that the same repealing clause also repeals all laws, if there are any, that gives any man, even Commissioner Dixon, the power to interfere with the efficient workings of the compulsory educational law, under the plea that such interference might conduce to the public health. Why does Commissioner Dixon, with such persistent activity, attempt to impair the efficiency of our public schools, without law or reason, by keeping o0ut of our schools those children for whom the State at such great expense has established such schools? He has no power to compel the pupil to be vaccinated. Hence, all he does is to force them to grow up in our midst in ignorance while the school advantages are wasted and the seats of the schoolroom are empty, in violation of the compulsory school law….
The borough officers who signed off on the above were: Charles W. Schoffstall, chief burgess; Cornelius Kocher, Charles L. Miller, and Joseph Bender, councilmen.
______________________________________
All this set up a potential clash between Dr. Samuel G. Dixon and the citizens of Jackson Township, which we will see came to a head with charges brought against certain school directors and community members.
______________________________________
Part 2 of a 7-part series of posts on the Jackson Township anti-vaccination case of 1906.
News articles from Newspapers.com.
Corrections and additional information shou