View report page

39
In the course of the year a mass of evidence accumulated which clearly
demonstrates the risk incurred by consumers of shellfish under existing conditions,
owing to lack of legislation for effectively dealing with the subject.
The evidence that Enteric Fever can be, and is, caused by eating sewagecontaminated
shellfish is overwhelming. Indeed, in my own recent
experience, the specific micro-organism of typhoid has been found both in
cockles and mussels, while the bacillus coli communis and bacillus enteritidis
sporogenes, indicative of sewage-pollution, have been present in almost every
sample of shellfish examined during the year.
The full significance of the presence of these bacilli in shellfish is clearly
presented to the lay mind in a letter to the " Lancet," of the 9th May last, on
this subject, by Dr. R. Tanner Hewlett, Professor of General Pathology and
Bacteriology in King's College, London, who states:—
"From my observations I have no hesitation, therefore, in concluding
"that oysters uncontaminated with sewage do not normally contain the
"colon or allied bacilli or the bacillus enteritidis sporogenes."
Other investigators have arrived at similar conclusions, and it is not too
much to sav that prompt and efficient legislation in the direction indicated in
my last Annual Report is, from the sanitarian's point of view, one of the most
pressing needs of the day.
In my remarks on oysters on page 28 will be found particulars of a case
where a magisterial order was made on the 25th June, 1903, for the condemnation
and destruction of a quantity of oysters (1,600) seized in the City
of London under Section 47 of the Public Health (London) Act, 1891.
The oysters were seized on the ground that they were sewagecontaminated,
this fact being proved by Dr. Klein's certificate to that effect.
So far as I am aware, this is the first case where shellfish has been ordered
to be destroyed on the evidence of bacteriological examination in police court
proceedings under the Public Health (London) Act, 1891, although in the
City unwholesome ice creams had been similarly dealt with.
Although successful in this instance in stopping the sale of a dangerous
article of food, yet it can be readily understood how impossible it would be to
examine all samples of shellfish at every shop in the district. Even if a
salesman were found dealing in shellfish from a source known to be polluted,
a bacterioscopic analysis would have to be made in every case before Section 47
of the above-mentioned Act could be put into operation.
It is true that when such cases are made the subject of police court
proceedings, and a condemnation and destruction order made, the person to