View report page

TO HIS WORSHIP THE MAYOR, THE ALDERMEN AND COUNCILLORS OF THE
BOROUGH OF PADDINGTON.
Mr. Mayor and Gentlemen,
I have the honour to submit to you my report on the Vital Statistics for 1908, and the
work of your Public Health Department during that year.
The statistics for the past year, as presented, are satisfactory, except in one particular
namely, the prevalence of scarlet fever. I write "as presented" because, although the
greatest possible care has been taken to secure accuracy of the facts under the immediate
purview of the Department, meaning thereby the numbers of births, deaths, etc., an equal
accuracy cannot be claimed for the other element necessary for the various rates, that is, the
numbers of the living. The estimates of population which have been used, derived from the
rate of growth of population between 1891 and 1901, are unreliable on account of the
interval (over seven years) which has elapsed since the last census, and the changes in
housing which are known to have taken place, but cannot be measured. A fairly large
number of flat properties have been erected since 1901, capable of housing a large population,
and much emigration has taken place to more out-lying districts, partly compensated, no
doubt, by immigration from the more central parts of the Metropolis. The number of empty
premises has been high during the same period—a rough survey made during the autumn
indicating vacant rooms sufficient to accommodate at least 10,000 inhabitants of the working
classes (see page 67), to which class of property the survey was limited. All those factors
ought to be taken into account in estimating the population, but the necessary arithmetical
data are wanting. It is noteworthy, however, that the natural increase in the population
(see page 2) does suggest that the estimates used are not very far from accuracy. It remains
to add that the rates given must be accepted subject to revision after the next census, some
two years hence.
For the first time for several years a slight increase in the birth-rate is recorded.
When writing on this subject the increase was thought to be a fictitious one, but inasmuch
as the rate for the whole country for the first quarter of the current year shows a further
increase (slight, it is true) I am inclined to review the opinion first expressed, and to hope that
a change in the birth-rate is at length about to be observed.
The statistics relating to infectious sickness (see page 6) would have been satisfactory
but for the exceptional prevalence of scarlet fever. The total morbidity rate for the year
(6.32 or 0.97 per 1,000 in excess of the quinquennial mean) includes a rate of 4.43 due to
scarlet fever, 1.26 higher than the mean (3.17). The morbidity rate after excluding scarlet
fever is 1.85, or 0.30 less than the corresponding quinquennial mean (2.15). Certain tentative
calculations relating to, and analyses of distribution of the prevalence of scarlet fever during
the past eight years point to changes in the incidence of the disease, the discussion of which
has been reserved for a future report.