Hints from the Health Department. Leaflet from the archive of the Society of Medical Officers of Health. Credit: Wellcome Collection, London
Report on the sanitary condition of the Hackney District for the year 1891
This page requires JavaScript
6
calculated to population when increased in the same ratio as in
1871-81, otherwise my death rates would have been wrong to a
very considerable extent. The populations in the sub-districts
were returned as follows:— Stoke Newington, 30,925, against
22,781 in 1881; Stamford Hill, 17,759, against 9,277 in 1881;
West Hackney, 42,602, against 37,610 in 1881; Hackney, 96,486,
against 76,911 in 1881; and South Hackney, 41,759, against
39,883 in 1881. It will be seen that the increase in the different
sub-registration districts was very unequal, and must continue to
be so, as the new ground to be covered in places is very different
in various parts of the parish. The number of inhabited houses
has increased since 1881, as in Stoke Newington they were 3,522,
and in 1891, 4,765. The excess in Stamford Hill was proportionately
larger still, as it was 3,176 in 1891, against 1,508 in 1881.
In West Hackney room was found for 520, the figures in 1881
having been 5,529, against 6,049. The greatest proportionate
increase occurred in Hackney, there being now 13,295 houses in
Hackney sub-division, against 11,146. In South Hackney the
number of new houses was not so large, as there were only 5,902
against 5,751 in 1881. Not only has the number of new houses
increased, but the number of inhabitants per house has increased,
which certainly tends to show that in outlying London new
buildings become occupied and old buildings closed, so that the
process of what we may call exclusion, will gradually lead to the
survival of the fittest, and the closing of the old, unfit, dirty houses,
will continue to act as it has done for years past.
Public Health Act.—It is commonly supposed that the Public
Health Act, which passed this year, and made a great improvement
in the sanitary law of London, repealing useless sections in other
Acts, as well as considerable additions, embraces all the sanitary
law by which London is governed. This is a mistake, as a large
number of Acts were not repealed, which is to be regretted, as
some will almost certainly fall into abeyance. It did not contain
so many additions as were expected, and the most important
referred to the cleansing and removal of snow, refuse and dust, by