View report page

7
As usual the rate of mortality in the Brompton registration
sub-district was much below that in the Town sub-district. It
becomes increasingly difficult, however, each succeeding year to fix
with precision the amount of difference, owing to the want of definite
information on the subject of population, it not being possible
to say how much of the increase of population in the entire parish
belongs to either district. It is certain, however, that building
operations have been conducted on a very large scale during the
last few years in Brompton, and that its population has increased
largely, so that the estimated death-rate is probably less favourable
than it should be to this singularly healthy section of the
parish. At the census of 1871 the population of the Brompton
sub-district was 28,651, and of the Town sub-district 91,583.
If the rate of increase had been equal in the two districts the population
of Brompton last year would have been 34,190, and of the
Town district 109,310. After making the necessary corrections for
deaths in public institutions this would give a death-rate of 17.1
per 1000 in Brompton, and 18.9 in the Town. But I think it is
fair to assume that the population of Brompton in July last was at
least 35,250, and if so its death-rate for the year would be
only 16.6; and that of the Town sub district 19.1 per 1000—the
deaths of non-parishioners in the Brompton Hospital being omitted
in these calculations. The death-rate in the female sex—whole
parish—was only 16.9 per 1,000; that of the male sex 23 per 1,000.
As stated in former reports the difference in the relative number of
the sexes is very great, the preponderance of females being in
ronnd numbers 26,700.
Before passing to details, with respect to the special causes of
death, it may be well to call attention to some facts with
reference to the zymotic diseases—a subject which has always
great interest for sanitarians, as their greatest victories have
been and will be secured in coping with these. Such another
discovery as that of Jenner may scarcely be expected— though
I would not limit the possible issue of patient research and
accumulated experience—but we may hope by a judicious
system of isolation of the sick and disinfection to stamp out infectious
maladies.
Thus by way of illustration it may be remarked that we have
better opportunities of dealing successfully with small-pox, scarlet
fever, and typhus fever than with the milder disease, measles;
for not only are parents more careful in the home treatment of
the graver diseases—striving for the most part to prevent them
from spreading—but there are hospitals for the reception of them,
to which measles is denied admission. It is true, probably, that
if measles was admitted into the hospitals of the Metropolitan
Sick Asylum Board few patients would be sent, as most cases prove
mild and harmless; and the severer cases generally destroy life by
some intercurrent complication, such as pneumonia, and thus when
the case becomes dangerous there would not be any great advantage
in removing it; but if the power of removal were given and acted