View report page

71
tious diseases, 791 rooms have been disinfected, and
36 tons of bedding, &c., removed for steam disinfection
and purification.
Under Sections 62 and 65 of the Public Health
(London) Act, 1891, notice of the provisions of the
said sections and of the penalties incurred for
infringement thereof must be served on the " master
of the house or part of the house...in which . . .
there is a person suffering from a dangerous infectious
disease." The service of such notice is now effected
under cover of "letter of advice" from the Medical
Officer of Health, with which are enclosed a sheet of
precautions suggested for the prevention of spread of
infection, and blank certificate of freedom of infection.
It is satisfactory to be able to report that in one
case only since the introduction of this system has a
medical practitioner refused to sign the certificate of
recovery, and that in nearly every case the disinfection
required is carried out by the Vestry Officials,
and not done privately. It is somewhat anomalous
that the Legislature should provide for the local
authority being promptly informed of the onset of
infection, but leave the matter of certification of
recovery or freedom from infection—by which alone
can the patient or his guardian be relieved of his responsibilities
under the sections of the Public Health
(London) Act, 1891, dealing with infectious diseases—
to the willingness of the medical profession to co-operate
with the Sanitary Officials. In all cases of puerperal