View report page

110
Annual Report of the London County Council, 1910
It was obviously desirable to do more than merely investigate notified cases, and the attempt
was indeed made, so far as this was practicable, to learn the facts concerning all hospital or infirmary
cases with regard to which any sort of suspicion that the case was one of human glanders was entertained.
It was further decided to make enquiry concerning the condition of health of employees in
all stables from which cases of equine glanders were reported, and here we were fortunate in having
the co-operation of the officers of the Public Control Department. Thanks to information supplied
from that department, knowledge was obtained, during the early months of 1910, of 67 stables from
which equine glanders had been notified, and a report was made upon each of these stables, and
enquiry was instituted as to the health of the employees. So far as the question last named is concerned,
the results of this investigation were entirely negative.
Some particulars of interest with regard to the 67 stables were, however, forthcoming.
First, as regards the character (size, sanitary condition, etc.) of the stables involved, it
transpired that:—
In 29 stables the number of horses did not exceed 10.
„ 10 „ „ was from 11—20.
„ 11 „ „ „ 21-40.
„ 6 „ „ „ 41—60.
„ 9 „ „ „ 61-150.
„ 2 „ „ was over 150.
We have no information showing the actual number of horses in London stables with differing
numbers of horses. During last year, however, by direction of the Public Health Committee, the
sanitary condition of some 300 London stables was investigated. When these 300 stables are divided
into gr6ups—less than 10 horses, 11-20 horses, and so on, as above—it is found that the total horse
population is approximately the same in each of these groups, viz., between five and six hundred
horses.
If cases of equine glanders were distributed at random throughout the London stables, it would
follow—on the assumption that there were, roughly speaking, about the same horse populations in each
group of stables—that the glanders cases would be distributed more or less equally among the several
groups. The actual figures given above, however, clearly show that, at the time of our enquiries,
there was a markedly greater incidence of notified cases of glanders upon the stables with few horses,
for while only 17 cases were reported from stables with over 40 horses, as many as 50 cases were
reported from stables with less than 40. It will be seen that 29 cases were reported from stables with
less than 10 horses.
We are aware of the fact that our 300 stables are not altogether typical of London stables
generally. On the whole, there was undoubtedly a tendency in selecting the 300 stables to select small
rather than large stables. Again, we note the average number of horses in our 300 stables was only
a little over 10, whereas reference to the reports of the Public Control Committee shows that the
average number of horses per stable, in which outbreaks of glanders were reported, 1st September,
1905, to 31st August, 1906, was considerably over 90, and the same average for the year ending March,
31st, 1910, was considerably over 60. Clearly the figures just given relate to groups of stables containing
quite a number of large stables, while our own figures as to the 300 stables relate to a group
containing, on the other hand, many small stables. This fact, however, considerably emphasizes
the disproportionate incidence of notified cases of glanders upon the small stables in the early months
of 1910 ; for, in taking as the standard the grouping of stables obtaining in our 300 stables, we are
clearly underestimating the number of large stables, and hence in actual fact, instead of finding
glanders cases notified in almost uninterruptedly descending figures as we proceed from the groups
of smaller to those of larger stables, the figures might have been expected, had the matter been one of
mere chance, to have gone just the other way—increasing, in fact, as we proceeded from the groups
containing the smaller to those containing the larger stables.
It is necessary, of course, to point out that, when notification of glanders first came into force,
it was less likely that cases of clinical glanders would be overlooked in larger than in smaller stables.
It may be said, indeed, that there has been a tendency during the last few years for cases to be
increasingly reported from the smaller stables, and this tendency, it may be urged, had become
especially marked at the time when the 67 cases referred to above were notified. Making all allowances,
however, we cannot fail to be struck with the markedly disproportionate incidence of equine
glanders, during the period under review, upon the smaller stables. It may be that this incidence
is really determined, in part at any rate, by the fact that horses which are diseased, or with respect
to which suspicion of glanders is entertained, tend to gravitate to the stables which are small and
ill kept. Furthermore, it may be that glanders is to some extent associated with bad conditions of
stabling, and accommodation of horses, just ar tuberculosis is associated with bad houses and po\erty
in man. AVith regard to overcrowding, the results are not, however, striking. The stables with
glandered horses, it is true, only provide in rather more than one half the total number of cases, more
than 800 cubic feet per horse; but a similar statement may be made with regard to the stables without
glandered horses. In three stables from which glanders was reported there was gross overcrowding,
only 600 cubic feet per horse in two instances, and in one instance only 576 cubic feet per
horse, being provided. Some extreme instances of overcrowding were, however, not infrequently noted
in the stables without glandered horses. Speaking generally, there was much need for improvement