View report page

July 28th. —"I have to report that six cases of infantile diarrhœa hare
developed during the last week, and that two of the babies are dangerously ill.
I ascribe the outbreak entirely to the poisoning of the children by the refuse
on the siding. The wind has been normal during the week, and the old method of
dealing with the refuse has been as before, except that the farce of hanging the
canvas over the Infirmary side of the trucks lias been continued."
August 11th.—" With reference to the nuisance on the adjoining siding, I have
to report that there has been no abatement.
Northerly winds have been prevalent, and all through the holidays the smell
of refuse and manure has been most objectionable.
In addition, since my last report there have been eight more cases of infective
enteritis among the children in the Infirmary, and I regret to say there have been
two deaths.
The responsibility for these deaths lies at the door of the Borough Council."
August 18th. —"I have to report four more cases of infective enteritis, making
eighteen in all, and two more deaths. One of these was the child named Olive
Marsh, who was found wrapped in brown paper in the street in March. This child
died on Saturday, and as the exposure had something to do with the death,
although the immediate cause was enteritis, I informed the Coroner, who held the
inquest this morning. A verdict of gastro-enteritis was returned. I informed the
Coroner and jury that the death was avoidable, and was due, in my opinion, to
poisoning by dust-bin refuse."
The most sensational reports from Southwark coincided with the
period of little general news, and it is not therefore surprising to find
considerable prominence given to them. Descriptions of "Southwark's
Plague Spot," "Poisoned by a Refuse Heap," "Council's Dust Heaps,"
were among the terms which were used in connection with the dispute.
Reports of the death-dealing dust (sic) were even in the provincial
papers, while one of the evening papers in London used the
complaint as a stick to belabour the then President of the Local
Government Board. Prominence was also given to the complaint
in an inaugural address to the Conference of Sanitary Inspectors
on "Dust." In fact, Camberwell was held up as an Authority
which, by its supine and obstinate behaviour, had caused disease
and death among its inhabitants.
It is not necessary to add that all this was done before any
answer to the charge was made. The following report was received
by the Council on September 24th and ordered to be sent to the
Local Government Board:—
To the Chairman and if embers of the Public Health Committee.
Gentlemen, —Although the question of the removal of dust has been placed by
the Council in the hands of the Works Committee, it is an integral part of public
health administration, and as such serious allegations have been made from
responible quarters with regard to nuisance which is caused at East Dulwich Station, I
deem it my duty to put the main facts before you for your consideration and judgment.
The dust of the Borough is dealt with mainly at Glengall Depôt and East
Dulwich Station, the latter being that which has to be removed by train, while the
former is taken away in barges.
The Depôt in Glengall Road has certainly been in use for twenty years or more,
while that at Grove Vale dates from even further back. The Infirmary of St.
Saviour's was built in 1886.
I have been across Glengall Bridge and in its neighbourhood in all conditions
of wind and weather, and have never noticed any nuisance arising from the dust,
neither have I had any complaints with regard to smell, although the Depot adjoins
two much frequented roads and factories employing a large number of hands.
So far as the East Dulwich dust removal is concerned, I can find no complaints
(except one of accumulation of rubbish in February, 1906) from any one before May
of this year.