View report page

40
recently, one at Dublin, and two at home. Two were in the
habit of eating fried fish. Three were obviously cases of
secondary infection, one being a sister, one a fellow servant,
and the third a fellow lodger and bedfellow of the primary
case. Another was possibly infected by a gardener discharged
from hospital after Enteric, who helped to prepare the food of
the household. Of the remainder, three were probably contracted
outside the Borough, one at Newchurch, one at Lee
Bridge, and one near Ashford.
76. The proportion of cases occurring in Eltham parish was
again excessive. Only one (in whose case the diagnosis was
doubtful) partook of the milk supply, which had caused the
prevalence in the two preceding years (See Annual Beport,
1903, page 35). One was the fellow servant of one of the milk
cases which occurred in the preceding year, and was no doubt
infected by her. This and the five other cases are referred to
in the preceding paragraph, one being secondary, three due to
water-cress, and one to shell fish.
77. The result of the steps taken in the previous year as to
the infected milk supply was practically to put a stop to its
sale in Eltham. I inquired as to any occurrence of Enteric in
the adjoining Borough, where I understood it was being sold,
but was informed that there had been no cases.
78. Bacteriological Diagnosis.—Blood serum from eleven
cases of suspected Enteric Fever were submitted to the Lister
Institute for the application of the Widal test, compared with
27, 30, and 23 in the three preceding years. A positive result
was obtained in five cases.
79. Twenty-one cases were removed to the Fever Hospital.