View report page

We are now faced with the curious position of one section of
the community maintaining that a serious loss to the country is
coming into being in that the births are not keeping pace with those
in some other countries, perhaps our most dangerous rivals in the
future. This was used as an argument during the war in favour of
the establishment and multiplication of maternity centres, as a
special attempt to reduce the infantile mortality. On the other
hand, we have a small but energetic party which is clamouring for
birth control and limitation, and which even seeks to use the centres
you have already established for that purpose.
From the figures given above it would certainly seem that the
efforts of the latter faction are meeting with active approval; but if
there had not been this interference with the course of nature I
still maintain that the gloomy views of 1915 as to the early
disappearance of the English have no solid foundation.
3,630 deaths were actually registered in the Borough; but only
those of the actual inhabitants of the Borough, whether they died
inside or outside its confines, have been taken into account for
statistical purposes, the remaining persons being assigned to the
localities in which they had their dwelling, while the deaths of our
own people occurring in institutions outside are included in the
first. When this has been done there results a total of 3,245,
which has to be used in the calculation of the death rate, compared
with 3,318 in the previous year.
The death rate therefore works out at 12.0, compared with
12.6 in 1919 and 11.6 in 1920; but as that of the first year was
calculated on a population of 273,803 and that of the second on
one of 284,995 it is obvious that these are both lower than they
should be.
It is therefore difficult to see that there has been any great
improvement, but, on the other hand, it is evident that after a
certain rate has been reached it is impossible to go any further.
Our sanitary progress, or otherwise, however, must be considered
in its relation to that of London as a whole, and also in its
position on the list of Metropolitan Boroughs. We were seventh in
1919 compared with eighth in 1920, when the Boroughs with a
lower rate were Paddington, Fulham, Hampstead, Wandsworth,
Lewisham and Woolwich; whereas in 1921 we are bracketed
with Stoke Newington and Paddington as ninth on the list, the
death rate for the County of London being 12.5, and the Boroughs
having a lower death rate than ourselves being Fulham, Westminster,
Hampstead, Hackney, Wandsworth, Lewisham, Woolwich, and the
City of London. Although our position is not quite so high in the
comparative list, it will be observed that Camberwell occupies no
dishonourable place among Boroughs of the same character in
population and housing.
In past reports it was the custom to give the death rates for
the various registration districts, but it is no longer any use making