London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

Kensington 1932

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Kensington Borough]

This page requires JavaScript

continued to previous page

2.Remedy of defects during the year without service of formal notices :—
Number of defective dwelling-houses rendered fit in consequence of informal action by the local authority or their officers123
3. Action under statutory powers during the year :—
A. Proceedings under sections 17, 18 and 23 of the Housing Act, 1930 :—
(1) Number of dwelling-houses in respect of which notices were served requiring repairs148
(2) Number of dwelling-houses which were rendered fit after service of formal notices :—
(a) By owners118
(b) By local authority in default of owners2
B.—Proceedings under Public Health Acts :—
(1) Number of dwelling-houses in respect of which notices were served requiring defects to be remedied2,205
(2) Number of dwelling-houses in which defects were remedied after service of formal notices :—
(a) By owners2,205
(b) By local authority in default of ownersNil
C.—Proceedings under sections 19 and 21 of the Housing Act, 1930 :—
(1) Number of dwelling-houses in respect of which demolition orders were made0
(2) Number of dwelling-houses demolished in pursuance of demolition orders3
D.—Proceedings under section 20 of the Housing Act, 1930 :—
(1) Number of separate tenements or underground rooms in respect of which closing orders were made9
(2) Number of separate tenements or underground rooms in respect of which closing orders were determined, the tenement or room having been rendered fit18

FOOD SUPPLY.
MILK SUPPLY.
Milk and Dairies (Consolidation) Act, 1915.—When the Act came into operation the council
decided that a number of samples of milk should be taken each year for the purpose of examination
for the presence of tubercle bacilli. In the year 1932, twelve samples were so taken, and
one only of these was found to contain tubercle bacilli. The result in this case was communicated
to the medical officer of health of the county in which the milk was produced.
Of 325 formal samples of milk taken under the Food and Drugs (Adulteration) Act in 1932,
9 were certified by the public analyst as adulterated, i.e., containing less than 3 per cent, of fat
or 8.5 per cent, of non-fatty solids. These particulars, however, do not give any indication of the
general quality of the milk supplied in Kensington; therefore, it will be interesting to note the
average composition of the samples taken during the year. These figures are given in the
following table :—

Average composition of formal milk samples taken in 1932.

Months.Number of formal samples taken.Average composition of all samples submitted, genuine and adulterated.Average composition of genuine samples.Ministry of Agriculture standard.
Percentage of milk fat.Percentage of solids not fat.Percentage of milk fatPercentage of solids not fat.Percentage of milk fat.Percentaee of solids not fat.
January133.578.703.588.783.08.5
February413.408.633.468.64
March353.328.603.368.69
April263.528.663.558.66
May183.398.663.39866
June243.338.773.368.76
July483.558.723.558.72
August63.588.783.588.78
September373.988.873.988.87Average composition of normal cow's milk.
October184.048.944.048.94
November424.008.944.008.94
December173.898.863.898.86Percentage of milk fat.Percentage of solids not (at.
3253638.763.658.773.78.9

The table shows that the average fat and non-fatty solid content for each month of the year
is well above the legal standard, and makes it clear that suspicion should fall on every sample
which at any time of the year shows a fat content as low as 3 per cent.