View report page

27
Second, as regards the Fever Hospital; this is an admirable
institution, admirably conducted and does great good;
moreover the Poor Law Board evidently looks upon it as the
proper place in which fever cases occurring amongst the poorest
of the population should be treated. But to this opinion I am
bound to demur, and mainly on two grounds. In the first place,
there is the objection which arises from there being only one such
institution to this vast metropolis; patients have to be brought
to it from long distances, (they come even by direction of the
Poor Law Board, from Greenwich and from Woolwich,) and of
those who come long distances it is well known that no inconsiderable
proportion die directly from the effects of their journey;
again, if such an institution be designed to receive and treat all
the fever cases occurring amongst the classes most prone to
fever, it should be an institution not of hundreds of beds like
the present, but I might almost say of thousands of beds, and the
creation of such overgrown hospitals is contrary to the sanitary
tendencies of the present day. In the second place, there is the
objection that the fever hospital is dependent almost entirely
on voluntary contributions. Now voluntary contributions are
always difficult to obtain ; and that it has been so in the case
of the fever hospital is shewn by the late appeals which it has
been necessary to make on its behalf to the charity of the public.
What then would be the difficulty of obtaining adequate funds
for the maintenance of the hospital if it consisted of 1000 beds
(say) instead of about 300 as it does now? what would be the
difficulty of obtaining money sufficient to maintain the buildings
alone, at times when (as in the absence of epidemics) not more
than 50 beds out of the 1000 are required for constant use?
But surely that which is required for the general benefit aud
security of the public, ought not to depend on the support of
the charitable few.