View report page

144
In addition, at the suggestion of Drs. Andrewes and Hurtley (the
experts employed by the Committee on the authority given by the
Council on 20th July, 1905), a map was prepared by the Borough
Engineer shewing the distribution of notifiable infectious diseases, and
the complaints received for 12 months.
Several important conditions which do not appear in the report
or map have to be borne in mind in considering this point.
Thus there is no return as to the number of cases in which the
house drains were tested and found to be defective, while several
infectious diseases are included in the return, such, for instance, as
scarlet fever, which have never been attributed to sewer air. In the
Hillfield Road area 64 per cent. of the notified cases were scarlet fever.
Attention is directed to the opinion of Dr. Andrewes as set out at
the bottom of page 19 of his report, which has been separately furnished
to the members of the Council.
After careful consideration of all the facts, your Committee have
arrived at the conclusion that the returns and map supply no evidence
that any relation exists between infectious diseases and complaints of
nuisances.
Four letters making specific complaints were referred to the
Committee, and have been considered by them.
It is obviously a matter of no small difficulty to establish a
connection between any particular case of illness and an alleged smell
arising from a sewer ventilator.
To maintain any such relation of cause and effect it would be
requisite to first eliminate any such source of disease as foul or imperfect
house drains, contaminated water, milk, or other food taken at home or
elsewhere, and any contact with another person capable of communicating
infection. In addition, to arrive at a convincing proof, it would
be necessary to obtain evidence of the presence in the body of the
patient of a specific germ which could also be demonstrated in the
emanation from the sewer. It is thus apparent that the investigation
of individual cases of alleged illness is not likely to lead to any useful
result.
In view, however, of the seriousness of the allegations contained
in the letter of Mr. E. W. Evill, of 33, Hillfield Road, your Committee