View report page

146
enquiry by the Chairman and by the late Dr. Littlejohn, as to the
Scientist best qualified for such work.
The month of September was selected by the Committee as the
most appropriate time for the investigation, as it was during this month
that the largest number of complaints have been received.
The report of Drs. Andrewes and Hurtley was received in
November, and is in the opinion of your Committee a very valuable
contribution both to a right understanding of the question as regards
this Borough, and to scientific knowledge generally.
Dealing first with the bacteriological portion of the report, it will
be observed that Dr. Andrewes in the Parliament Hill experiment (p. 9 of
his report) found that the sewer air bacteria were much less numerous
than those of fresh air—in this case as 1 to 3.
This observation is in entire accord with the views of other
scientists such as Haldan and Carnelley, who represented at Dundee,
Westminster, and Bristol, and J. P. Laws who worked for the London
County Council.
It must accordingly be regarded as established that the number
of germs in sewer air is very small, and always smaller than in outside
air.
Having thus dealt with the number of germs, Dr. Andrewes
proceeds to consider their nature.
There he finds ground in believing that sewer air may be the bearer
of microbes derived from sewage (p. 18 of his report) but he considers
the evidence is slender and incomplete.
With regard to the sewer air as it escapes from the ventilators
into the atmosphere—and this is after all the most important practical
issue— Dr. Andrewes considers the chance of disease being thus
conveyed is almost negligible.
The results of Dr. Hurtley's analyses show a very satisfactory
diminution in carbonic acid gas as compared with Dr. Tidy's analyses
at the time of Mr. Mansergh's report. It will be noticed that Dr.
Hurtley attributes this to the increase in the number of ventilating
grids.