courtesy title) indicated a willingness to try the new method. With Mather urging him on, Boylston inoculated his six-year-old son and two black slaves on June 26. They took a mild infection and soon recovered. Encouraged by this success, Boylston continued, and by July 19 had inoculated ten people. 13
|
As the news of Boylston's experiment got aroundBoston was a town of 11,000 peoplepublic clamor against inoculation began. And it continued despite Boylston's attempts to ease popular fears by explaining the practice in the Boston Gazette . The Selectmen, the officials who carried out the wishes of the Town Meeting and who provided day-to-day government, responded to the opposition on July 21, by telling Boylston to stop. Three days later William Douglass, in the Boston News-Letter , questioned Boylston's qualifications, calling him "illiterate" and accusing him of lacking the ability to read the communications of Timonius and Pylarimus. This produced an answer from the Mathers and other Boston ministers, including Benjamin Colman, within a week. The following week William Douglass took to the pages of the New England Courant , James Franklin's paper, to lash Boylston for the inoculations, "the Practice of Greek old Women." Douglass knew that to stop Boylston for good he would have to discourage his chief supporters who were, of course, Cotton and Increase Mather. Therefore, Douglass hit them too, pointing out their medical incapacities by asserting that they recommended inoculation on the basis of their characters-not their knowledge. Cotton Mather, of course, could not ignore this attackand the battle for public support was on. While the controversy kept the local printers busy, Boylston added to the public's anger by resuming inoculationsin violation of the Selectmen's order. In August he inoculated seventeen persons; in September, thirty-one; in October, eighteen; in November, one hundred and four. And other practitioners in the town were trying their hand at it too. 14
|
When, early in June, Mather had proposed to the practitioners that they consider inoculation, he had urged caution upon them. To Douglass and evidently to much of the town, caution had been thrown to the winds when Boylston deliberate infected his son and slaves. The success of vaccination in our own day should not make us regard the opposition unsympathetically. Although no one in Boston died from inoculation, as Douglass pointed out,
|
|