“Importing Trachoma: The Introduction into Britain of American Ideas of an ‘Immigrant Disease’, 1892- 1906”, written by Krista Maglen primarily argues that trachoma became a significant discussion in the British political and medical scene, and played a role in the 1905 Alien Act: Britain’s first restrictive immigration act. Furthermore, Maglen also contends that increased legislation in America led to the perception of trachoma as a disease carried by immigrants.

The article begins by outlining that migrants have frequently been associated with disease, and their communities in Britain were often perceived as places where disease was prevalent. Additionally, Maglen mentions that little has been written about trachoma’s association with immigrants in Britain and the link it has with America. She does, however, mention that historian Kenneth Collins discusses trachoma and its link to Jewish immigrants in Glasgow at the beginning of the nineteenth century.

Furthermore, Maglen explains the importance of the fact that over one million of the estimated 2.4 million Russian and Polish immigrants who settled in America passed through British ports. This is key because America’s immigration legislations restricted the entrance of migrants with disease, which meant that those who were rejected from America were taken back to their last port of departure. Steamships would frequently return migrants to Britain instead of Eastern and Central Europe as it was less distance from America. Therefore, many Brits were not supportive of the ‘undesirable’ immigrants being brought back to live in Britain, thus, the American view of particular diseases as ‘immigrant diseases’ quickly became popular in Britain. In addition, Brits viewed these migrants as not only an economic burden, but also a threat to public health. Maglen emphasises that trachoma was easily identifiable through inflammation and redness in the eyes, therefore making it easy for anti-immigration campaigners to push their agenda due to the disease’s aspect of visibility.

Furthermore, Maglen states that this issue became prominent in the British medical press in 1892 and remained there throughout the decade. Additionally, the Royal Commission on Alien Immigration in 1902-03 took evidence about trachoma from ophthalmic physicians, including Francis Tyrrell who stated that “the Jewish people are peculiarly prone to trachoma”. Although it was transparent that immigrants weren’t the cause of trachoma, the final report did not oppose to the categorising of trachoma sufferers as undesirable for entry into Britain. Maglen concludes that the restrictions of trachoma sufferers did not have a significant impact on Britain because trachoma did not generally have a large impact in Britain, and was, for the most part, a concept used by anti-immigration campaigners to further their cause.

Overall, this article is well-written, well-structured and provides a convincing argument. Maglen uses multiple primary sources, such as the evidence of a Medical Officer and ophthalmic surgeon at the Royal Commission on Alien Immigration in 1902, to support her argument, which strengthens the source overall. The article highlights one of the reasons why the Aliens Act of 1905 was introduced and shows how the British perception of migrants was altered by American legislation.