To the "A.V." agitation, with a curious misapprehension of the state of the case, he devoted one paragraph only.

It ran something like this:-- "I am told that our opponents, putting aside the great and general issues upon which I have had the honour to address you, attempt to gain support by entering upon a crusade--to my mind a most pernicious crusade--against the law of compulsory vaccination.

I am not concerned to defend that law, because practically in the mind of all reasonable men it stands beyond attack.

It is, I am told, suggested that the Act should be amended by freeing from the usual penalties any parent who chooses to advance a plea of conscientious objection against the vaccination of his children.

Such an argument seems to me too puerile, I had almost said too wicked, to dwell upon, for in its issue it would mean that at the whim of individuals innocent children might be exposed to disease, disfigurement, and death, and the whole community through them to a very real and imminent danger.