View report page

32
of the house, her aunt and uncle being both out. Her
tongue and the desquamation of the skin clearly indicated
that she was suffering from Scarlet Fever, and
she stated that she had had a sore throat and rash from
Easter Tuesday (21st April) till the following Sunday.
She returned to school a week later (May 4th). No
doctor was called in because her uncle was out of work.
The mother called to see me next day, and denied the
girl's statement as to the rash. I am of opinion that
this was a case of Scarlet Fever deliberately concealed,
followed by exposure in an infectious state.
The following report was presented to your Council in
May:—
"In my last report to your Committee, it was stated that
the death-rates in the Borough, both from Scarlet Fever
and Diphtheria, have been less in the past five years
than in any previous period, and are also less than the
average for London. Since that report was written the
Registrar-General's Annual Summary has been issued,
and shows that the London death-rate from Scarlet
Fever, during the five years 1903-7, was 0.11 per 1000;
in Woolwich it was 0.08, or only about two-thirds as
much as London. During the same period the London
death rate from Diphtheria was 0.15, and in Woolwich it
was the same, but last year Woolwich was one of the
seven Metropolitan Boroughs having the lowest deathrate
from Diphtheria. The death-rate in Woolwich was
0.12, and in London 0.16. The death-rate from both
these diseases has steadily declined, and the Diphtheria
death-rate is now only about one-third of what it was
between 1890 and 1900; and the Scarlet Fever deathrate
less than one-half. Hence, as far as death-rates