View report page

69
that it does. The population in the middle of 1885
according to that estimate is 14,830. This is
undoubtedly too low.
Births and
Birth-rate.
During the year 1885, 322 children were
born in this sub-district, 169 boys and
153 girls. The birth-rate is 21.7 per 1,000 per
annum. This rate is undoubtedly very low, being
10.9 under the birth-rate of London and 11.8 under
that of the chief towns of England. In poorer
neighbourhoods it is not uncommon to get a birth-rate
twice as large, shewing that the better classes are
either less prolific or more provident.
Deaths and
Death-rate.
The number of deaths known to have
occurred during the year 1885 only reached
the modest total of 167. Of these 93 were of males
and 74 of females. The death-rate is only 11.2 per
1,000 per annum, 8.4 lower than that of London
and 9.3 lower than that of the chief towns. In the
table below (Table I.) will be found the births and
deaths with their rates for the last ten years, and it
Will be seen how low the past year stands even
compared with our small mortality rates. Only one
year (1881) comes near it, the average death-rate
being 14.2. There are no towns the death-rates of which
are given in the Registrar-General's summary for 1885
with so low a rate. It is an interesting (and to
residents or intending residents important) point how far
the death-rate of a place may represent the amount of
general illness among the population. Unless that deathrate
is unduly exalted by the presence of some widespread
disease (such as an epidemic) I feel sure for
practical purposes that the fatal cases are a very fair
means of estimating the state of the public health. This
view is borne out by the very uniform number of fatal