Dr. Thresh's report report to the Local Government Board on the extensive prevalence of typhoid fever in Southend, Essex / John C. Thresh.

  • Thresh, John C. (John Clough), 1850-1932.
Date:
[1890?]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Dr. Thresh's report report to the Local Government Board on the extensive prevalence of typhoid fever in Southend, Essex / John C. Thresh. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    42/46 (page 4)
    Par. 6.. “ These main sewers are inadequate.” On this point, probably, the Local Board will adopt Dr. Thresh’s recommendation to consult a skilled Sewer Engineer. Mr. Shirley Murphy’s opinion in March, 1888, was “ The sewers appear to be well constructed and “ speaking generally, in capacity, are equal to the present requirement of the district. Line 5. « It is acknowledged that they (the sewers) are defective in other respects.” This statement would appear to imply that the Local Board, who alone have the power to correct defects, or their responsible Officers, admit that the sewers are defective, but this is contrary to the fact, and they are believed by the Local Board to be both adequate and in good condition. The experiments referred to later in the same paragraph are believed to be in¬ capable of verification, but even were they so they are hardly of value for the purpose foi which they are used, as the whole excess of water found (amounting, it is believed, to about 200 gallons per hour) can be accounted for by the numerous land springs, &c., which now discharge into the sewers at various points. Page 19, par. 2. “ In ouly eight cases were the drains known to be trapped before joining the sewers.” Doubtless the majority of cases of typhoid have occurred in houses built more than 10 years ago, i.e. before the existing bye-laws, requiring the trapping of drains, came into force. But even here the statement is below what is believed to be the fact, as the Surveyor alone can specify 15 of the houses affected where the drains are known to be trapped. Par. 3. The fatal case occurring in this house at the end of 1889 did not come to the know¬ ledge of the Board, or the Sanitary Committee, or the Inspector of Nuisances till the two concurrent cases originating there this year were notified. The house was disinfected as soon as possible after the recovery of these last cases, and there has been no illness there since. In the case of the house referred to as having an old pan closet, the inference to be drawn from the paragraph is that this was the cause of illness ; but this is known not to be the fact; nor is it correct that all the inmates who slept on the same landing contracted typhoid. Par. 4 & 5. The last two paragraphs on this page hardly give a full account of the examin¬ ations carried out by Dr. Thresh, and therefore the impression conveyed can hardly be accepted as a just one. The group of cottages referred to in the first of the two paragraphs consists of a row of 12, built about 20 years ago, and in which there had been no infectious illness until 1890. The defects disclosed are correctly stated. It should be added, how¬ ever, that in this row of 12 cottages only one case of typhoid occurred. The dram described as exposed at the adjoining block was a branch drain laid for one water-closet only, and had no separate ventilator. It is hardly remarkable, therefore, that the smoke could not be driven beyond the first closet pan, as there was no “ beyond.” In the house to which this closet belongs one case of typhoid occurred. Dr. Thresh also, on the same day, examined a drain close by that last referred to, and which serves three closets besides the sink wastes from five cottages. This drain was found perfect, as no smoke could be forced through anywhere except the drain ventilator at the far end, and when this was