View report page

1904]
104
houses, confined (as they might be, but unfortunately are not) to a single room
for weeks, with their fathers and mothers constantly with them, and with their
brothers and sisters and their friends running in and out to them. Is this
what should be allowed? It certainly could not be prevented—is such a state
of affairs conducive to the best interests of the public health? is such a
practice or isolation in hospital the more likely to prevent the spread of the
disease? Common sense, despite all reasonings to the contrary, will dictate
the answers at once and unambiguously.
The question is not argued here as to whether treatment at home or in
the hospital is the better for the patients, especially when their ordinary surroundings
in populous places are considered, but the unhesitating opinion of the
Medical Officer of Health, after nearly twelve years' actual hospital experience,
and with six years' experience as a private practitioner, and altogether an
active experience of twenty-nine years, is that the removal to hospital is best
for the patient.
Fatality.—Among 1,146 cases there occurred 35 deaths, or a fatality of
3.0 per cent., as compared with 3.2 in the thirteen years 1891-1903.