View report page

9, Birkbeck Street.
Mrs. K , the wife of a baker, was summoned before Mr.
Haden Corser for exposing articles of clothing infected with scarlet
fever. Mrs. K's child had been certified by a well-known medical
practitioner in the neighbourhood to be suffering from scarlet fever;
the offer of removal to hospital was declined, and the mother who
was nursing the sick child was seen by Inspector Keif serving in the
shop.
The day before the hearing we were informed that the medical
practioner referred to had never personally attended the child, but
had sent his unqualified assistant. The notification certificate was
therefore valueless as evidence that the child was suffering from
scarlet fever, and as I did not examine the patient when I visited
the premises, we were unable to prove our case, and so withdrew
the summons in court. The Magistrate, however, was of opinion
that we should have stopped the case earlier and gave £3 3s. costs
against the Vestry.
The giving of the illegal certificate of notification under these
circumstances appears to come within the meaning of the following
resolution passed by the Medical Council on April 21st, 1893:—
" That the Council record on its minutes, for the information
of those whom it may concern, that charges of gross
misconduct in the employment of unqualified practitioners
in respect of the signing of medical certificates required for
the purposes of any law or lawful contract are, if brought
before the Council, regarded by the Council as charges of
infamous conduct under the Medical Act."
Upon the occasion of my visit to these premises I found the mother
(who was attending upon the sick child) in the Bakehouse with an
armful of soiled linen. This Bakehouse is situated at the back of
the premises and the only means of access to the yard is by passing
through the Bakehouse. The owner was accordingly summoned
under Section 16, of the Factory and Workshops Act, 1883, and the
case was heard immediately after the one just detailed. I contended