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

View report page

London County Council 1892

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for London County Council]

This page requires JavaScript

The following table shows the number of deaths attributed to this disease and the death-rates from this cause in each district in 1892.

Deaths, 1892.Death rate per 10,000, 1892.Death rate per 10,000, 1885-91.Deaths, 1892.Death rate per 10,000, 1892.Death rate per 10,000. 1885-91.
West—East—
Shoreditch1038.48.2
Kensington1126.75.0Bethnal -green13610.59.0
Hammersmith13313.37.1Whitechapel658.77.0
Fulham12813.0St. George-in.theEast6213-611.0
Paddington806.74.0
Chelsea10610.95.7Limehouse7212.610.9
St. George, Hanover. square496.43.3Mile-end Old-town676.27.3
Poplar1509.07.1
Westminster7714.05.3
St. James17704.9South—
North—St. Saviour, Southwark238.69.6
Marylebone1379.85.6St. George, Southwark6911.68.7
Hampstead253.52.4
Pancras23310.05.8Newington18215.66.2
Islington1795.56.7St. Olave1612.57.0
Hackney1024.35.3Bermondsey698.27.9
Central—Rotherhithe4111.16.2
Lambeth1876.75.3
St. Giles471216.7Battersea905.8
St. Martin - in - the -Fields96.44.6Wandsworth825.05.3
Camberwell1918.05.4
Strand5321.85.0Greenwich1066.36.0
Holborn30916.9Lewisham151.63.2
Clerkenwell467.09.4Woolwich194.75.4
St. Luke378.99.5Plumstead232.54.7
London, City of174.62.7London3,3887.96.2

Scarlet Fever.

Scarlet fever caused 1,169 deaths in London in 1892, or about twice the number which occurred in the preceding year. The death rates of this disease per 1,000 living during 1892, and previous periods, have been as follows—

1861.701.1418910.14
1871.800.6018920.27
1881.900.33

The excess and defect of mortality during each of the years 1859 to 1892 in relation to the
mean mortality of the whole period will be seen by reference to diagram VI. It will be observed that as
compared with former years there has in recent times been a marked decline in the mortality from this
disease. The circumstances that influence the prevalence of this disease are not wholly understood, but
the opportunity given by the hospitals of the Metropolitan Asylums Board for the isolation of the
infectious sick may be reckoned among the factors which have led to this reduction. The larger use of
these institutions by those who have learnt to value this means of isolating their sick will be appreciated
by reference to diagram VII. This larger use is no doubt in great measure due to the fact that these
hospitals have gained the confidence of London residents, to the passing of the Notification of Infectious
Diseases Act in 1889, and to the passing of the Public Health (London) Act in 1891. Patients since
the passing of the last Act have been admitted into these hospitals free of charge, and although in
previous years the costs of maintenance of the sick were only exceptionally recovered from the friends
of the patients, it is more than probable that the occasional charge for this purpose in some degree
militated against the use of these institutions by poor persons.
During the autumn of 1892 the hospitals became full, and the Managers were unable to receive
all persons for whom application for admission was made. References to the want of hospital accommodation
for cases of scarlet fever appear in the reports of the medical officers of health of St. Martin-in-theFields,
St. Luke, St. George-the-Martyr, Wandsworth, Chelsea, Kensington and Marylebone, and the
vestry of the last parish themselves made hospital provision for the use of the inhabitants of the district
by taking a house in which 55 patients suffering from scarlet fever were treated during September and
October. The medical officer of health of Marylebone also states that "a lady received for some little
time cases of scarlet fever in a house in that district."
The disease is stated to have been generally of a mild character by the medical officers of health
of Kensington, Plumstead, Mile-end Old-town and Poplar. The fatality of the cases treated in the
hospitals of the Metropolitan Asylums Board was in 1892 slightly in excess of the fatality in 1891; but
with this exception less than that of any year since 1873.

It is interesting to note that the number of deaths in London per cent. of cases of this disease notified in London during the years since notification of infectious disease has been required, was as follows*—

18905.718924.4
18915.2

* It should, however, be borne in mind that the number of cases of infectious disease occurring during
the years 1890 and 1891 is probably somewhat understated owing to imperfect notification.