View report page

4
It must be remembered, however, that the order of 1886 only makes it optional on the part of
the owner to give notice of the existence of the disease. It is stated, moreover, in the Annual Report
of the Veterinary Department for 1889, that "the returns for 1887 are probably much too high, because
for some time after the Anthrax Order of 1886 was passed, inspectors of local authorities often included
black leg or symptomatic anthrax in their returns, but this source of error has probably now been entirely
eliminated."
While it is quite likely that a number of cases were included in the 1887 returns as the result
of errors of diagnosis, it is also probable that some anthrax cases escaped recognition or were not
notified. The novelty of the procedure under the order of 1886 would tend, in the absence of any
compensating source of error, to an under-statement of anthrax prevalence during the first few years after
the passing of the order. In an editorial article in the Journal of Comparative Pathology and Therapeutics
for September, 1893, the reliability of the returns furnished by the Board of Agriculture is
discussed, and it is stated that "the custom of granting compensation which has been adopted by
several local authorities has tended to swell the number of returns in 1892," that "during the recent
summer months a very considerable proportion of the cases returned as anthrax were not of that
nature," and that "the increase in the number of outbreaks during the past summer has been more
apparent than real."
While, therefore, the data furnished in these returns will be as time goes on of increasing value,
they must not be accepted as giving an absolutely accurate picture of anthrax prevalence among cattle
in Great Britain at the present time. It seems, however, to be unquestioned that the system of reporting
outbreaks has shown that anthrax is much more rife among farm stock in Great Britain than was
supposed to be the case prior to 1886.
It is remarkable that certain counties are particularly prone to anthrax outbreaks, this proclivity
being marked throughout a series of years. Thus, in the appendix to the Report of the Veterinary
Department for the year 1892, p. 51, a table is given of outbreaks in Great Britain for the five years
1888-92. In this table it is seen that Northamptonshire, Somersetshire and the West Riding of
Yorkshire are particularly favourite seats for anthrax outbreaks.
B.—Cases of anthrax recorded in London since 1873.
From what has been noted as to the history of anthrax it will be clear that but little value can be
attached to any statement as to anthrax prevalence in London prior to 1880. The table in the appendix
dates back to 1873, the earlier cases are, however, almost without exception from Guy's Hospital, and it
cannot be assumed that they represent all the cases of anthrax which occurred. The record for the
years subsequent to the outbreak of 1882-3 may be regarded as more and more nearly approximating to
the actual facts, though even in recent years it is probable that cases of anthrax have been overlooked.
The cases dealt with in the appendix are 119 in number; in a few instances the diagnosis must
be regarded as doubtful, but such cases have been included as being more likely to be anthrax than not.
The list does not include three cases seen by a gentleman practising in the South of London of
which no notes are available, nor does it include one or two other suspicious cases which could not be
further investigated.
As regards the apparent source of infection—
90 cases occurred in persons engaged in the hide and skin trade.
5 cases occurred in persons engaged in slaughtering animals.
7 cases occurred in persons engaged in the manipulation of horsehair or the manufacture of brushes.
1 case occurred in a person employed in a bacteriological laboratory.
16 cases occurred in persons in whom the source of infection was not traceable.
The 16 cases last mentioned include among them the doubtful cases which have already been
alluded to. Probably, therefore, the number given under the head " source of infection not traceable "
is somewhat too high.
It will be seen that during recent years there has been a growing tendency for cases of anthrax
to be detected in persons who have nothing to do with the Bermondsey hide and skin trade. Nearly
95 per cent. of the total number of cases recorded by Mr. Spear occurred in persons engaged in that
trade, while the cases collected since the construction of his table show a reduction in this respect
from 95 per cent. to less than 70 per cent. of the total number of cases among persons so employed.
Mr. Spear made careful inquiry into the precise nature of the employment in each of the 37 persons
engaged in the hide and skin trade of whom he obtained knowledge. He classified them as follows—
One stevedore, one foreman, nine wharf labourers, eleven warehouse labourers, one merchant, one
carter, twelve tanners, and one unhairer of rabbit skins. These cases naturally fall, however, into two
main groups, viz., cases occurring in persons who manipulate the hides in course of their removal to
the broker's warehouse, or who are engaged in sorting them in the warehouse, and secondly, cases
occurring in persons who manipulate the hides after they have passed out of the hands of the broker.
Classifying the cases under these two heads, a comparison may be made between Mr. Spear's figures
and the later results—
Mr. Spear's figures Later figures
1873-1883. 1883-1893.
Persons manipulating hides while in the possession of 23 40
the hide broker.
Persons manipulating hides after their removal from 14 9
the broker's warehouse. (12 tanners) (3 tanners)
Doubtful — 4