View report page

12
From the Returns of the Registrar General, it appears that in 1868
the deaths in the Metropolis from the miasmatic class of diseases (18 in
number) including all the epidemic diseases, were 17,131, while the
tubercular and the allied class of diseases were fatal to 19,541; the former
being 23.4 percent. and the latter 27.8 percent. of the total mortality.
If we were to include the deaths from infantile diarrhoea, premature
births, and insanity, in the return of deaths from scrofulous diseases, for
they are to a considerable extent likewise caused by defective ventilation,
the proportion of such deaths to the total mortality would far exceed
27.8 per cent.
The last annual return issued by the Poor Law Board shows that on
the first of January, 1871, there were 48,444 insane persons receiving relief
from the poor rate in England and Wales—22,000 males and 26,444 females.
The return states that 4.5 percent. of the pauperism on the 1st January
last is attributable to insanity. With these startling facts before us, the
question for our earnest consideration is how can we so effectually deal with
that mass of property in London which is so defectively ventilated as to
cause not only a large annual mortality but which likewise so enfeebles the
constitution of those who escape early death, as renders them unable to
obtain a livelihood by honest labour, and thus tending to increase our
criminal population. The very aspect of our pauper and criminal classes
will readily convince the beholder that the greater number of such persons
are both mentally and physically incapacitated from performing remunerative
labour.
When, however, it is proposed either to close houses unfit for habitation
under the Nuisances' Removal Act, or to take proceedings against the
owner of property which is in like condition, then difficulties arise, which
either prevent or delay the carrying out of the law. The sympathy of the
public is more frequently manifested towards the owners of the unhealthy
property than to the victims, the poor, who, by inhabiting such houses, are
deprived of their health, and consequently are compelled to become burdensome
to the ratepayers.
Surely the vested rights of the ratepayers ought to be fully as much
considered as the vested rights of the owners of property which is unfit for
habitation. We have certainly no right to tax the ratepayers for the
support of those sick persons whose sickness is caused by the unhealthy
state of their dwellings, in order that the owner of such property may
receive the annual income derived from it. To give compensation, therefore,
to the owners of unhealthy dwellings, when such are ordered either
to be closed or demolished, is out of the question, and should not be for one
moment considered. In fact when houses are unfit for habitation and
cannot be made fit for that purpose, they cease to be property as dwelling
houses.