View report page

31
attacked. Institution C suffered the most severely of the seven institutions, being especially involved
in the latter part of 1917, the whole of 1918 and the early months of 1919.
4s regards dysentery (shown below the line), the deaths increased in 1917 and 1918, but this
increase was largely attributable to the deaths in institutions. Among the latter B, D, E and F had
already suffered markedly in 1915; F showed a considerable prevalence in 1916 ; and five of the institutions
suffered heavily in 1917 and 1918. Particularly noteworthy is the incidence of dysentery with
almost complete absence of entericfever in A, the limitation of enteric fever to females in two of the institutions,and
the fact that D, E, F and G, which suffered markedly from dysentery, escaped comparatively
lightly as regards enteric fever; while C, which suffered most acutely from enteric fever, had but little
dysentery, this being notably the case during the special prevalence of enteric fever.
The facts as regards inoculation may be briefly summarised as follows:—In B and D a few members
of the female staff were inoculated in 1918 and 1919; in E nearly 100 of the staff were inoculated
during the same years, and in G some 160 of the staff were inoculated in addition to 14 patients,
Inoculation was systematically carried out in institution C from the middle of 1919 onwards,
It is noteworthy that all the 18 cases occurring in this institution (C), during the lattei
part of 1919, and in 1920 (four of which were fatal), were in inoculated persons. The intervals betweer
completion of inoculation and onset of illness varied from 10 days to 17 months ; in six of the 18 cases
the interval was less than 6 months.
B.—Administration.
It may be noted at the outset that certain statistical information available is summarised ir
Table II., see page 49
Tuberculous Milk—L.C.C. (General Powers) Acts, 1904, Part V. and 1907, Part IV.
The Council's inspectors obtained 1,483 samples from churns of milk consigned from the country
to the various London railway termini, and these were submitted to the Lister Institute for bacteiiological
examination. The milk was sent to London from 36 counties. Of the 1,294 completed examinations,
76 or 5 9 per cent, yielded tubercle bacilli, as against 6 5 per cent, in 1919, 7 4 per cent, in 1918,
and 10 3 per cent, in 1917. In connection with these samples the veterinary inspector visited 67 farms
and examined 2,737 cows. It was found that 63 cows—i.e., 2'3 per cent., showed signs of tuberculosis
in one or more of its forms, or were otherwise unhealthy. In the case of each cow suffering from tuberculosis
the farmer undertook to have the animal slaughtered, and meanwhile not again to use the milk.
In addition, the inspector revisited 326 farms and inspected 14,352 cows ; all the animals examined at
these revisits were found to be in a satisfactory condition with the exception of 145, which appeared to
be tuberculous. In each instance the owner undertook to have the animal removed.
During the year 1920 there were four inspections of the cows in the 108 London cowsheds.- In all
7,120 examinations were made. No cases of tuberculosis of the udder were detected, but in 144 cases
other unhealthy conditions of the udder were found. One cow was found presenting symptoms of
general tuberculosis.
Offensive Trades.
Section 19 of the Public Health (London) Act, 1891, requires the sanction of the Council to the
establishment anew of noxious trades or the enlargement of the premises on which they are conducted.
During the year under review sanction has been given to the establishment of the businesses of a gutscraper,
a catgut-maker or catgut manufacturer, and a tripe-dresser. In three instances also the establishment
anew of the business of a slaughterer of cattle has been sanctioned. An application for permission
to establish anew the business of a soap-boiler was not granted.
Under the provisions of the same section, orders were made by the Council declaring the businesses
of a dresser of fur-skins and a slaughterer of poultry to be offensive trades These orders were in due
course confirmed by the Minister of Health.
Common and Seamen's Lodging Houses.
The administration of the Common Lodging-houses Acts devolved upon the Council in 1894.
By the passing of the London County Council (General Powers) Act, 1902, the Council obtained powers
to license common lodging-houses annually. New bylaws for the regulation of such houses came into
force on the 1st October, 1903.
Common
lodging
houses.

In 1901 the London County Council made bylaws under section 214 of the Merchant Shipping
Act, 1894, dealing with the inspection, sanitary condition and well ordering of seamen's lodging-houses.
In 1909 the bylaws were amended in certain particulars and a new series came into force on 1st January,
Seamen's
lodging
houses.