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

View report page

Kensington 1958

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

This page requires JavaScript

- 23 -
adjoins the West London Coroner's Court. Consequently, the Council
decided to close their premises and made an arrangement with the
Hammersmith Borough Council that all Kensington cases should be
accommodated in the Hammersmith Mortuary. The agreement provides that
an annual payment of £500 shall be made for this service.
Prom the beginning of the year until 15th April, one hundred
and thirty-seven bodies were admitted to the Kensington Mortuary; postmortem
examinations were made in ninety-eight cases, and in twenty-two
of these the Coroner held inquests.
Borough Cremation Service
The Council have an arrangement with the General Cemetery Company
who own the Kensal Green Crematorium at the north-west corner of the borough,
whereby a reduced charge of five guineas is made for the cremation of
Kensington residents, subject to certain financial conditions.
In 1958, there were two hundred and sixty-three Kensington
cremations, in comparison with two hundred and eighty-three in 1957 and
two hundred and fifty-five in 1956. These figures compare with only
sixty Kensington cremations in 1948, (prior to the arrangement coming
into effect.)
Medical Examinations of Staff
The Medical Officer of Health undertakes all medical examinations
of staff for the purposes of the Borough Council's Superannuation Scheme.
During the year one hundred and fifty-four examinations were made.
Dog Nuisances
Apart from being an objectionable social offence, fouling of
footways by dogs is a public health nuisance for which an adequate remedy
is hard to find.
While it has been shown that dogs can carry and excrete germs
capable of producing illness in man, it is seldom that cases of human
disease can positively be related to infections originating from this
source. Nevertheless, such instances do occur and the potential risk
cannot be ignored. Certainly dog filth is an attraction to flies and
blowflies, with consequent possibilities of conveyance of infection.
The main objection, however, to the fouling of pavements and grass
verges by dog excreta is the nauseating revulsion, embarrassment and
distress caused by chance pollution of shoes, clothing, mats and carpets,
necessitating disgusting and time-consuming cleansing operations.
The Council's byelaw dealing with this nuisance provides that:-
"No person being in charge of a dog shall allow
the animal to foul the footway of any street or public
place by depositing its excrement thereon. For the
purpose of this byelaw the owner of the dog shall be
deemed to be in charge thereof, unless the Court is
satisfied that at the time when the dog fouled the
footway it had been placed in or taken into the charge
of some other person."
During the year four summonses were issued under this byelaw.
Convictions were obtained and fines totalling £2. 0s. Od. with £1. 16s. 6d.
costs were imposed.