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

View report page

Paddington 1906

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Paddington, Metropolitan Borough of]

This page requires JavaScript

ii..
Summarising the foregoing, it appears that with a decrease in the marriage rate of 21 per
cent. there has been a decrease in the legitimate birth-rate, calculated on the married women, of
exactly the same amount. On the other hand, with a larger proportion of unmarried and widowed
women of reproductive ages, there has been a decrease of 23 per cent. in the illegitimate rate.
I must confess that the results obtained from a consideration of the data given above
have been a complete surprise, but I am doubtful whether the equality be more than a
coincidence.
For the last two years full particulars of the births registered within the Borough have
been obtained from the Registrars, and enquiries have been made for the past four years at
certain out-lying institutions for information of births of children of parents belonging to the
Borough. The corrected figures have been given in these reports. In the Summary already
referred to, published while this Report was in the press, there is a table giving the
fully corrected rates for all the Metropolitan Boroughs since 1901. For the purpose of
comparison with the rates given in Table 3 of this report, the appended rates for this and
the adjacent Boroughs are given:—

Birth-rates

After distribution of outlying Births.

Per 1,000 living.Per 1,000 married women, 15-45 years.
Average. 1901-5.1900.average. 1901-5.1906.
Paddington23.622.7194.9187.6
Kensington20.419.2188.6176.4
Westminster18.317.2164.1152.1
Marylebone22.121.2183.7176.6
• Hampstead17.616.5164.4153.4

From information which has been obtained during the past two years, I have reason to
believe that more births remain unregistered than has been suspected hitherto. Moreover,
births are registered at false addresses in considerable numbers, as is shown both by the
experience of the Staff when making their visits after the births of children, and by the
Returns of the Vaccination Officers. In certain instances it has been found that the births
have been falsely registered in adjacent Boroughs, and consequently lost for the purpose of
calculating the birth-rate. It is hoped that the "Notification of Births Bill" now before the
House of Commons will make the civil registration of births more complete, an aim which
had no place in the scheme of the framers of the Bill.
As regards sickness, the past year was signalised by an undue prevalence of scarlet
fever. No cause for the outbreak was discovered, and, as what may be termed the main
epidemic began towards the close of summer holidays, the schools could not be held
responsible. The fact that for the previous two years the prevalence of the disease had
been considerably lower in the Borough than in the Metropolis undoubtedly favoured the
extension of the disease when it had gained a footing. Towards the middle of the autumn,
the schools had some share in spreading the disease, and certain classes were closed in
consequence.
It is satisfactory to be able to record a continued decrease in the prevalence of enteric
fever, a disease which is in many respects the most delicate test of the "sanitary" condition
of a district. I desire to draw attention to the history of a small outbreak of this disease