View report page

London County Council.
DISINFECTION AND DESTRUCTION OF INFECTED
ARTICLES AND DISINFECTION OF ROOMS.
Report by the medical officer submitting a report by Dr. Young on the means
for disinfection provided in London, and on the provision made for the temporary
shelter of persons during the disinfection of their homes.
(Printed by order of the Public Health Committee, 19th January, 1899.)
Public Health Department,
8, St. Martin's Place, W.C.,
I present Dr. Young's report on the provision made in London sanitary districts for the
disinfection and destruction of infected articles, the disinfection of rooms, and for the temporary
shelter of persons during the disinfection of their homes.
In December, 1895, I presented to the Committee a report showing the provision that had been
made in respect of disinfection. Since that date the districts of Hammersmith, St. Marylebone,
Clerkenwell, St. Luke, and Limehouse have been provided with steam in replacement of dry-heat
apparatus and as a result, at the present time every district in London, with the exception of St.
Saviour, Southwark, and Charlton sub-district, has made provision for disinfection by steam. All the
authorities do not, however, yet possess steam-disinfecting apparatus of their own, but such provision
has been decided upon or is in the course of being made by the districts of Paddington, Fulham,
Battersea and Rotkerhithe. It will be seen by reference to Dr. Young's report that when this is
completed, the sanitary authorities of Kensington, St. Martin-in-the-Fields, and of the following subdistricts
of Wandsworth, viz., Clapham, Putney, Streatham and Tooting will depend upon the services
of a contractor. As regards the sub-districts of Wandsworth district, it may be stated that
a steam apparatus has been recently provided in the parish of Wandsworth, but that it was not
used by the other parishes of the district at the time of Dr. Young's inquiry. The authorities of St.
George-in-the-East and St. Olave have arranged for the use of apparatus in public hospitals, and the
authorities of Stoke Newington and Holborn, and of the sub-districts of Lee and Kidbrooke and
Eltham have arranged with other sanitary authorities for the use of their apparatus. Recurring to
the cases of St. Saviour and Charlton it should be stated that St. Saviour possesses a dry-heat
apparatus, while in Charlton reliance is placed upon fumigation, with occasional destruction. The
unsatisfactory nature of this method does not need emphasising.
There is much variety in the procedure adopted in the disinfection of rooms and in their
subsequent cleansing. The stripping of walls and the cleansing of ceilings is done by the authority
in a number of districts as part of the business of disinfection after some or all kinds of infectious
disease, and in these districts there is the best guarantee that the disinfection is complete. In other
districts it is the practice to serve a notice, and if this is not complied with, for the authority to do
the work without charge. In other districts, again, it is the practice to serve a notice and subsequently
to institute proceedings in those cases in which the condition of the room constitutes a nuisance.
The Public Health (London) Act provides that the sanitary authority shall serve a notice on
the masters or owners of the houses that they will cleanse and disinfect the house unless informed by
him within twenty-four hours that he will cleanse and disinfect the house to the satisfaction of the
medical officer of health or any other legally qualified medical practitioner, within a time fixed in the
notice. Dr. Young states that in London generally the master or owner only exceptionally avails
himself of this opportunity, but that in Mile-end Old-town and Poplar it is a frequent practice
for disinfection to be effected by private arrangement. It is doubtful whether under these circumstances
the work is as efficiently done as it would be by the sanitary authority. With few exceptions the
sanitary authority makes no charge for disinfection.
The provision of shelters for the use of persons during the disinfection of their homes makes
but slow progress in London. There are fifteen districts which have made no provision, but in some
of these districts the officers are authorised to hire accommodation when it is needed. It is unnecessary
to say that this is altogether unsatisfactory, and that the accommodation to be of any real use must
be always available. In a few instances it is proposed to provide shelters, but probably an amendment
of the Public Health Act, making the provision of accommodation continuously available, will be
necessary before all the districts in London are properly furnished in this respect. In a few of the
districts the provision which has been made does not include sleeping accommodation, and hence it
would not appear to be contemplated that the occupation of the infected room should cease for as long
a period as twenty-four hours.
Shirley F. Murphy,
Medical Officer of Health.
[7797—(1-245)