View report page

249
tioned were free from the bacilli of diphtheria. On
the 9th, swabs were taken from the father (J. N.) and
daughter (R. N.). From the former no culture was
obtained, from the latter the bacillus was isolated.
Antiseptic gargles, etc., were ordered, and the child
kept apart. A further swab taken on the 17th gave
no culture. It is probable that had R. N. gone awry
immediately after the 9th, she would have given
rise to an outbreak at the place visited by her, even
if she did not herself become actively infected.
In a number of families cases of diphtheria and
scarlet fever have been reported during the year at
such short intervals as to suggest erroneous diagnosis
in respect of one or the other disease. Enquiries
have, however, made it evident that there were no
such errors, and the occurrence of such double infection
is now a matter for special investigation.
School Attendance.
It is almost impossible to measure at all accurately
the extent to which school attendance favours the
spread of infection. That it does so, is practically
demonstrated by the rule (which is not, however,
without exception) that fewer cases of infectious disease
are reported during the vacations. In the
appended tabular statement, an attempt has been
made to set out the relative frequency of infectious
illness among families sending children to the public