View report page

4
Besides bronchitis, other diseases of the breathing organs assisted in
swelling the mortality beyond the common. Inflammation of the lungs and
consumption (which for the present purpose may be classed with lung diseases)
were fatal much above the average.
The divisions of London that most contributed to the high mortality were
(Appendix I.) the Central and the East. In the group of districts comprised
in these divisions, the deaths have averaged 29 per thousand, being nearly 3
per thousand in excess of 1863, when they had already attained a higher mortality
than in any recent year. The excess in certain ot these districts has
been remarkable, reaching in some to a point a quarter beyond the mortality
of 1863 and even to a third or more beyond their usual rate of death.
section II.—On the Mortality of St. Giles' in 1864. From all Causes.
Comparison with other Districts.
What has been stated of the high mortality of London and of the Central
Districts, among which St. Giles' is included, almost anticipates the statement
that there has been an unusually high mortality in St. Giles'. In every
season of great fatality, especially if this have resulted from causes that
operate, as cold does, chiefly upon the poor, our own district habitually suffers
much, and usually it has suffered out of proportion even to the increase of
mortality observed elsewhere.
In 1864 the deaths registered in St. Giles' amounted (after several
corrections for duplicate entries in the Registrars' returns) to 1601, and 74
persons removed from St. Giles' died in hospitals situate in other districts.
The registered deaths amount therefore to 29.74 per thousand of our population,
and if the deaths of our parishioners in hospitals be included, the
corrected death.rate* is 31.10 per thousand. There has been no such
mortality as this since the health of the district has been made matter of
study in these reports. It exceeds by 2 per thousand the death.rate of 1862,
the year of highest previous mortality.
It appears therefore that our district has to lament equally with the rest
of London, the remarkable fatality of the past year, and we cannot fail to be
struck by the circumstance that in front of an advance in other parts of the
town, St. Giles' keeps still advancing in its mortality. But it is right to point
out that our own rise in mortality, great as it is, is this year scarcely beyond
what has occurred in London as a whole, and that it is a satisfactory exception
to former experience that the rise should not be particularly great in St. Giles'.
Further, that of the districts among which St. Giles' is situated, St. Pancras
Holborn and the Strand, but especially the Strand, have all exhibited a more
serious rise (though not reaching the same actual amount of mortality) in their
death.rate than St. Giles', when the rate of 1864 is compared with the mean
of 1862 and 1863. And, as has already been mentioned, some other districts
have had a more formidable increase even than those now mentioned.
A reference to the table on the opposite page and to the subjoined
abstract of this and similar tables for the last eight years affords data for an
accurate estimate of our mortality, both actual and by comparison with
neighbouring districts, and leads to the conclusion that our district as well as
* The corrected mortality comprises then for St. Giles's as for other districts. 1—those
who die in the houses of the district, 2—those who die in the Workhouse belonging to
the district,—and 3, those who die in hospitals having been removed from the houses of
the district, on account of their fatal illness. In no instance can the attempt be made to
seperate persons who die in a district into a class of permanent residents and a class of
chance comers. People of the latter class, being those who resort especially to the
Workhouse and to common lodging houses, are probably more numerous in St. Giles's
than in most of the districts with which it is compared.