Small Pox Vaccine—Its Introduction under Wellesley

Summary

O. P. Bhatnagar’s article discusses the introduction of the smallpox vaccine to India during Lord Wellesley’s administration in the early nineteenth century. At that time smallpox inoculation (variolation) was practiced, but the newly developed vaccine offered a safer alternative. To oversee its introduction, Wellesley appointed Dr. John Shoolbred as Superintendent General of Vaccine Inoculation. Bhatnagar describes the establishment of a central vaccination office and a staff that included Brahmin and Muslim inoculators paid modest salaries, a peon to collect patients and a clerk to keep registers. Local surgeons served as subordinate superintendents at different centres across Company territory. The campaign faced significant resistance. Shoolbred identified three major obstacles: a general dislike of innovation, the apathy of the population towards measures without immediate benefit, and active hostility from traditional inoculators who feared for their livelihoods. Many people declared the cow‑derived vaccine impure and circulated stories of vaccinated individuals contracting eruptions (which often turned out to be chicken pox). To overcome these challenges, Shoolbred appealed to the Supreme Government for support, recommended that civil and military officers promote vaccination and requested that printed leaflets in local languages explain its benefits. The government eventually instructed magistrates and native officials to encourage vaccination, and respectable Indians were vaccinated publicly to inspire confidence. Despite difficulties, progress was made: the article notes that by 1805 regular efforts were underway and thousands were vaccinated. Shoolbred emphasised that the vaccine did not spread contagion like variolation and saved countless lives. Bhatnagar places the introduction of vaccination within the broader context of colonial public health. He notes the financial investment, the adaptation of administrative structures and the interplay between European medical practices and indigenous social attitudes. The article also highlights the ethical debates of the time, including the role of caste in hiring inoculators and the need to respect religious sentiments while promoting public welfare.