Dr. Parsons's report to the Local Government Board on certain outbreaks of diphtheria in the Leek rural sanitary district, Staffordshire / [H. Franklin Parsons].

  • Parsons, H. Franklin (Henry Franklin), 1846-1913.
Date:
[1889]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Dr. Parsons's report to the Local Government Board on certain outbreaks of diphtheria in the Leek rural sanitary district, Staffordshire / [H. Franklin Parsons]. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    9/10 (page 9)
    As an instalment of this scheme a hospital was established at Sandy Lane, between Endon and Norton, which did good service while it was in existence, but in September 1881 the Authority decided to close it, on the ground of its being an unnecessary expense. Only one patient had been admitted during the year, which had been comparatively free from infectious disease, and the maintenance of the hospital had cost 211. 19s. 2d. Within a few weeks after the closing of the hospital a case of typhoid fever was brought home to a house in the immediate neighbourhood of the hospital, and as the patient was not able to bear removal to the Leek Fever Hospital, 5 miles distant, the father and other working members of the family were compelled to leave their employment, and apply to the Guardians for relief. One after another took the disease, and the whole family had to be supported out of the rates at a cost of over 30s. a week for five months. On February 22nd, 1882, the Rural Sanitary Authority passed a resolution that a hospital should be opened in a central situation in the Norton and Endon district. A house was found at a rent of 151. a year which was reported by a committee to be admirably suited for the purpose of an infectious diseases hospital, but on their report being brought up it was resolved by the Authority to rescind their resolution for the establishment of a hospital, and the district has since remained unprovided with one. There is a good fever hospital at Leek belonging to the Leek Urban Sanitary Authority, which is stated to be available for cases in the rural district occurring within a convenient distance of it, but as the chief places in the rural district are from 5 to 10 miles from Leek, the distance, as in the above- mentioned case, often prevents its being made use of. In fact I learn that only two cases from the rural district have been received into the Leek Fever Hospital. When the first of the late diphtheria cases—that at Bradshaw—occurred, an endeavour was made to get the patient removed to the Fever Hospital, but at that time all the wards were occupied with scarlatina and typhoid cases from the urban district, so that she could not be admitted. In consequence she had to remain at home, where she died. The five other children of the family all contracted diphtheria, and one of them died. The Local Government Board have repeatedly urged upon the Leek Rural Sanitary Authority the advisability of providing hospital accommodation for their district, but hitherto without result. Another primary duty of a sanitary authority which requires more atten¬ tion than it receives in this district is the remedying of unwholesome conditions of houses and their surroundings. It will be seen from the fore¬ going pages that at all the houses where diphtheria had occurred gross and dangerous nuisances were found to exist, such as a damp, dilapidated, and ill- ventilated condition of the house; defective drains, some in direct connexion with the interior of the house; faultily-placed privies; and water supplies exposed to contamination; and though there is no sufficient ground for ascribing the origin of the diphtheria solely to such defects, it is likely enough that they assisted its spread and aggravated its severity. Yet (with the single exception of H orton Vicarage, where efficient works had been sponta¬ neously carried out by the vicar) I found that these conditions had remained entirely unremedied or without any effectual remedy up to the time of my visit. In some cases they had been unobserved; in others notices had been served, but not complied with; and in others again trivial works had been done, which were insufficient for their purpose. In the latter cases, the failure to secure the effectual carrying out of the required works appeared to be the result of the view locally taken of the legal powers of the Authority—a view which I understand has been superseded by recent legal decisions—viz., that the Authority have only power to order the abatement of a nuisance, and must not specify in their notice the particular works required to be executed for the purpose. However this may be, having regard to the preva¬ lent want of sanitary knowledge, the difficulty of getting country workmen to carry out works in any way but that to which they have been accustomed, and the hardship felt by owners when works which they have had carried out to the best of their knowledge and ability are not found satisfactory, it seems desirable, in the interests of owners themselves as well as of the public health, that when they are called upon to execute structural works