Part 8

┌────────────────────┬───────────┬────────┬───────────┬──────────────────────┐ │ │ │ Deaths │Deaths from│ │ │ Districts. │Population.│ from │Cholera in │ Water Supply. │ │ │ │Cholera.│ 10,000 │ │ │ │ │ │ living. │ │ ├────────────────────┼───────────┼────────┼─────┬─────┼──────────────────────┤ │ │ │ │ │ │Southwark Water Works,│ │St. George the │ │ │ │ │ from Thames at │ │ Martyr, Southwark}│ 77,796│ 856│ 110│ │ London Bridge. No │ │ │ │ │ │ │ filter or settling │ │ │ │ │ │ │ reservoir. │ │St. Olave’s, │ „ │ „ │ „ │ │ „ │ │ Southwark} │ │ │ │ │ │ │St. Saviour’s, │ „ │ „ │ „ │ │ „ │ │ Southwark} │ │ │ │ │ │ ├────────────────────┼───────────┼────────┼─────┼─────┼──────────────────────┤ │ │ │ │ │ │Chiefly by Lambeth │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Water Works, from │ │Christchurch, │ 13,705│ 35│ 25}│ │ Thames opposite │ │ Southwark │ │ │ │ │ Hungerford Market. │ │ │ │ │ │ │ No filter or │ │ │ │ │ │ │ settling reservoir. │ │Lambeth │ 87,856│ 337│ 38}│ │ „ │ ├────────────────────┼───────────┼────────┼─────┼─────┼──────────────────────┤ │ │ │ │ │ │Chiefly by South │ │ │ │ │ │ │ London Water Works, │ │Newington │ 44,526│ 200│ 45}│ │ from Thames at │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Vauxhall Bridge. │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Reservoirs. No │ │ │ │ │ │ │ filter. │ │Camberwell │ 28,231│ 107│ 37}│ │ „ │ ├────────────────────┼───────────┼────────┼─────┼─────┼──────────────────────┤ │ │ │ │ │ │South London Water │ │Bermondsey │ 29,741│ 210│ 70}│ │ Works, & Tidal │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Ditches. │ │Rotherhithe │ 12,875│ 19│ 14}│ │ „ │ ├────────────────────┼───────────┼────────┼─────┼─────┼──────────────────────┤ │ │ │ │ │ │East London │ │Bethnal Green │ 62,018│ 170│ 27}│ 42{ │ Waterworks, from │ │ │ │ │ │ │ tidal part of river │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Lea at Old Ford. │ │St. │ 38,505│ 123│ 31}│ „ │ „ │ │ George-in-the-East│ │ │ │ │ │ │Poplar │ 25,066│ 107│ 42}│ „ │ „ │ │Stepney │ 78,826│ 225│ 28}│ „ │ „ │ │Whitechapel │ 52,848│ 470│ 88}│ „ │ „ │ ├────────────────────┼───────────┼────────┼─────┼─────┼──────────────────────┤ │ │ │ │ │ │New River Company, │ │ │ │ │ │ │ from various │ │ │ │ │ │ │ springs, and river │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Lea in │ │Clerkenwell │ 47,634│ 65│ 13}│ 34{ │ Hertfordshire; and │ │ │ │ │ │ │ occasionally from │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Thames at Broken │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Wharf, near │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Blackfriar’s Bridge.│ │St. Giles │ 52,907│ 280│ 52}│ „ │ „ │ │Holborn │ 27,334│ 46│ 16}│ „ │ „ │ │Islington │ 37,316│ 39│ 10}│ „ │ „ │ │London City │ 55,798│ 359│ 64}│ „ │ „ │ │East and West London│ No return.│ │ }│ „ │ „ │ │St. Luke’s │ 46,642│ 118│ 25}│ „ │ „ │ │Strand │ 9,937│ 37│ 37}│ „ │ „ │ ├────────────────────┼───────────┼────────┼─────┼─────┼──────────────────────┤ │ │ │ │ │ │New River and East │ │Hackney │ 7,326│ 8│ 10 }│ │ London Water │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Companies. │ │Shoreditch │ 68,564│ 57│ 8 }│ │ „ │ ├────────────────────┼───────────┼────────┼─────┼─────┼──────────────────────┤ │ │ │ │ │ │Chelsea Water Works, │ │Westminster │ 124,585│ 325│ 26│ │ from Thames at │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Chelsea. Reservoirs │ │ │ │ │ │ │ and filters. │ ├────────────────────┼───────────┼────────┼─────┼─────┼──────────────────────┤ │ │ │ │ │ │Chelsea Water Works │ │ │ │ │ │ │ and Grand Junction │ │St. George, Hanover │ │ │ │ │ Water Works, also │ │ Sq. │ 58,209│ 74│ 12}│ 15{ │ supplying water from│ │ │ │ │ │ │ Thames at Chelsea, │ │ │ │ │ │ │ and having settling │ │ │ │ │ │ │ reservoirs. │ │Kensington │ 75,130│ 134│ 17}│ „ │ „ │ ├────────────────────┼───────────┼────────┼─────┼─────┼──────────────────────┤ │ │ │ │ │ │West Middlesex Water │ │St. Marylebone │ 122,206│ 224│ 20│ │ Works, from Thames │ │ │ │ │ │ │ at Hammersmith. │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Settling reservoirs.│ ├────────────────────┼───────────┼────────┼─────┼─────┼──────────────────────┤ │ │ │ │ │ │West Middlesex, New │ │St. Pancras │ 103,548│ 111│ 10│ │ River, and Hampstead│ │ │ │ │ │ │ Water Works. │ └────────────────────┴───────────┴────────┴─────┴─────┴──────────────────────┘

Westminster suffered more in 1832 than St. George, Hanover Square, and Kensington, which at that time had the same water. This arose from the poor and crowded state of part of its population. The number of cases of cholera communicated by the water would be the same in one district as in the other; but in one district the disease would spread also from person to person more than in the others.

Between 1832 and 1849 many changes took place in the water supply of London. The Southwark Water Company united with the South London Water Company, to form a new Company under the name of the Southwark and Vauxhall Company. The water works at London Bridge were abolished, and the united company derived their supply from the Thames at Battersea Fields, about half a mile above Vauxhall Bridge. The Lambeth Water Company continued to obtain their supply opposite to Hungerford Market; but they had established a small reservoir at Brixton.

But whilst these changes had been made by the water companies, changes still greater had taken place in the river, partly from the increase of population, but much more from the abolition of cesspools and the almost universal adoption of waterclosets in their stead. The Thames in 1849 was more impure at Battersea Fields than it had been in 1832 at London Bridge. A clause which prevented the South London Water Company from laying their pipes within two miles of the Lambeth Water Works was repealed in 1834, and the two Companies were in active competition for many years, the result of which is, that the pipes of the Lambeth Water Company and those of the Southwark and Vauxhall Company pass together down all the streets of several of the south districts. As the water of both these Companies was nearly equal in its impurity in 1849, this circumstance was of but little consequence at that time; but it will be shown further on that it afterwards led to very important results.

On the north side of the Thames the Water Companies and their districts remained the same, but some alterations were made in the sources of supply. The East London Water Company ceased to obtain water at Old Ford, and got it from the river Lea, above Lea Bridge, out of the influence of the tide and free from sewage, except that from some part of Upper Clapton. The Grand Junction Company removed their works from Chelsea to Brentford, where they formed large settling reservoirs. The New River Company entirely ceased to employ the steam engine for obtaining water from the Thames. The supply of the other Water Companies remained the same as in 1832.

The accompanying table (No. 3), shows the mortality from cholera in the various registration districts of London in 1849, together with the water supply. The annual value of house and shop-room for each person is also shown, as a criterion, to a great extent, of the state of overcrowding or the reverse. The deaths from cholera and the value of house room, are taken from the “Report on the Cholera of 1849,” by Dr. Farr, of the General Register Office. The water supply is indicated merely by the name of the Companies. After the explanation given above of the source of supply, this will be sufficient. It is only necessary to add, that the Kent Water Company derive their supply from the river Ravensbourne, and the Hampstead Company from springs and reservoirs at Hampstead.

=TABLE III,=

Showing the mortality from Cholera, and the Water Supply, in the Districts of London, in 1849. The Districts are arranged in the order of their Mortality from Cholera.

┌─────────────┬──────────┬────────┬─────────┬──────┬─────────────────────────┐ │ │ │ │ │Annual│ │ │ │ │ │ │value │ │ │ │ │ │ │ of │ │ │ │Population│ Deaths │Deaths by│House │ │ │ District. │ in the │ from │ Cholera │& Shop│ Water Supply. │ │ │middle of │Cholera.│to 10,000│ room │ │ │ │ 1849. │ │inhabits.│ to │ │ │ │ │ │ │ each │ │ │ │ │ │ │person│ │ │ │ │ │ │in £. │ │ ├─────────────┼──────────┼────────┼─────────┼──────┼─────────────────────────┤ │ │ │ │ │ │Southwark and Vauxhall │ │Rotherhithe │ 17,208│ 352│ 205│ 4.238│ Water Works, Kent Water│ │ │ │ │ │ │ Works, & Tidal Ditches.│ │St. Olave, │ 19,278│ 349│ 181│ 4.559│Southwark and Vauxhall. │ │ Southwark │ │ │ │ │ │ │St. George, │ 50,900│ 836│ 164│ 3.518│Southwark and Vauxhall, │ │ Southwark │ │ │ │ │ Lambeth. │ │Bermondsey │ 45,500│ 734│ 161│ 3.077│Southwark and Vauxhall. │ │St. Saviour, │ 35,227│ 539│ 153│ 5.291│Southwark and Vauxhall. │ │ Southwark │ │ │ │ │ │ │Newington │ 63,074│ 907│ 144│ 3.788│Southwark and Vauxhall, │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Lambeth. │ │Lambeth │ 134,768│ 1618│ 120│ 4.389│Southwark and Vauxhall, │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Lambeth. │ │Wandsworth │ 48,446│ 484│ 100│ 4.839│Pump-wells, Southwark and│ │ │ │ │ │ │ Vauxhall, river Wandle.│ │Camberwell │ 51,714│ 504│ 97│ 4.508│Southwark and Vauxhall, │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Lambeth. │ │West London │ 28,829│ 429│ 96│ 7.454│New River. │ │Bethnal Green│ 87,263│ 789│ 90│ 1.480│East London. │ │Shoreditch │ 104,122│ 789│ 76│ 3.103│New River, East London. │ │Greenwich │ 95,954│ 718│ 75│ 3.379│Kent. │ │Poplar │ 44,103│ 313│ 71│ 7.360│East London. │ │Westminster │ 64,109│ 437│ 68│ 4.189│Chelsea. │ │Whitechapel │ 78,590│ 506│ 64│ 3.388│East London. │ │St. Giles │ 54,062│ 285│ 53│ 5.635│New River. │ │Stepney │ 106,988│ 501│ 47│ 3.319│East London. │ │Chelsea │ 53,379│ 247│ 46│ 4.210│Chelsea. │ │East London │ 43,495│ 182│ 45│ 4.823│New River. │ │St. George’s,│ 47,334│ 199│ 42│ 4.753│East London. │ │ East │ │ │ │ │ │ │London City │ 55,816│ 207│ 38│17.676│New River. │ │St. Martin │ 24,557│ 91│ 37│11.844│New River. │ │Strand │ 44,254│ 156│ 35│ 7.374│New River. │ │Holborn │ 46,134│ 161│ 35│ 5.883│New River. │ │St. Luke │ 53,234│ 183│ 34│ 3.731│New River. │ │Kensington │ │ │ │ │West Middlesex, Chelsea, │ │ (except │ 110,491│ 260│ 33│ 5.070│ Grand Junction. │ │ Paddington)│ │ │ │ │ │ │Lewisham │ 32,299│ 96│ 30│ 4.824│Kent. │ │Belgrave │ 37,918│ 105│ 28│ 8.875│Chelsea. │ │Hackney │ 55,152│ 139│ 25│ 4.397│New River, East London. │ │Islington │ 87,761│ 187│ 22│ 5.494│New River. │ │St. Pancras │ 160,122│ 360│ 22│ 4.871│New River, Hampstead, │ │ │ │ │ │ │ West Middlesex. │ │Clerkenwell │ 63,499│ 121│ 19│ 4.138│New River. │ │Marylebone │ 153,960│ 261│ 17│ 7.586│West Middlesex. │ │St. James, │ 36,426│ 57│ 16│12.669│Grand Junction, New │ │ Westminster│ │ │ │ │ River. │ │Paddington │ 41,267│ 35│ 8│ 9.349│Grand Junction. │ │Hampstead │ 11,572│ 9│ 8│ 5.804│Hampstead, West │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Middlesex. │ │Hanover Sq. &│ 33,196│ 26│ 8│16.754│Grand Junction. │ │ May Fair │ │ │ │ │ │ ├─────────────┼──────────┼────────┼─────────┼──────┼─────────────────────────┤ │London │ 2,280,282│ 14137│ 62│ │ │ └─────────────┴──────────┴────────┴─────────┴──────┴─────────────────────────┘

A glance at the table shows that in every district to which the supply of the Southwark and Vauxhall, or the Lambeth Water Company extends, the cholera was more fatal than in any other district whatever. The only other water company deriving a supply from the Thames, in a situation where it is much contaminated with the contents of the sewers, was the Chelsea Company. But this company, which supplies some of the most fashionable parts of London, took great pains to filter the water before its distribution, and in so doing no doubt separated, amongst other matters, the greater portion of that which causes cholera. On the other hand, although the Southwark and Vauxhall and the Lambeth Water Companies professed to filter the water, they supplied it in a most impure condition. Even in the following year, when Dr. Hassall made an examination of it, he found in it the hairs of animals and numerous substances which had passed through the alimentary canal. Speaking of the water supply of London generally, Dr. Hassall says:—

“It will be observed, that the water of the companies on the Surrey side of London, viz., the Southwark, Vauxhall, and Lambeth, is by far the worst of all those who take their supply from the Thames.”

In the north districts of London, which suffered much less from cholera than the south districts, the mortality was chiefly influenced by the poverty and crowding of the population. The New River Company having entirely left off the use of their engine in the city, their water, being entirely free from sewage, could have had no share in the propagation of cholera. It is probable also, that the water of the East London Company, obtained above Lea Bridge, had no share in propagating the malady; and that this is true also of the West Middlesex Company, obtaining their supply from the Thames at Hammersmith; and of the Grand Junction Company, obtaining their supply at Brentford. All these Water Companies have large settling reservoirs. It is probable also, as I stated above, that the Chelsea Company in 1849, by careful filtration and by detaining the water in their reservoirs, rendered it in a great degree innocuous.

Some parts of London suffered by the contamination of the pump-wells in 1849, and the cholera in the districts near the river was increased by the practice, amongst those who are occupied on the Thames, of obtaining water to drink by dipping a pail into it. It will be shown further on, that persons occupied on the river suffered more from cholera than others. Dr. Baly makes the following inquiry in his Report to the College of Physicians.

“How did it happen, if the character of the water has a great influence on the mortality from cholera, that in the Belgrave district only 28 persons in 10,000 died, and in the Westminster district, also supplied by the Chelsea Company, 68 persons in 10,000; and, again, that in the Wandsworth district the mortality was only 100, and in the district of St. Olave 181 in 10,000 inhabitants—both these districts receiving their supply from the Southwark Company?”

The water of the Chelsea Company has been alluded to above, but whether this water had any share in the propagation of cholera or not, it is perfectly in accordance with the mode of communication of the disease which I am advocating, that it should spread more in the crowded habitations of the poor, in Westminster, than in the commodious houses of the Belgrave district. In examining the effect of polluted water as a medium of the cholera poison, it is necessary to bear constantly in mind the more direct way in which the poison is also swallowed, as I explained in the commencement of this work. As regards St. Olave’s and Wandsworth, Dr. Baly was apparently not aware that, whilst almost every house in the first of these districts is supplied by the water company, and has no other supply, the pipes of the company extend to only a part of the Wandsworth district, a large part of it having only pump-wells.

The epidemic of 1849 was a continuance or revival of that which commenced in the autumn of 1848, and there are some circumstances connected with the first cases which are very remarkable, and well worthy of notice. It has been already stated (page 3) that the first case of decided Asiatic cholera in London, in the autumn of 1848, was that of a seaman from Hamburgh, and that the next case occurred in the very room in which the first patient died. These cases occurred in Horsleydown, close to the Thames. In the evening of the day on which the second case occurred in Horsleydown, a man was taken ill in Lower Fore Street, Lambeth, and died on the following morning. At the same time that this case occurred in Lambeth, the first of a series of cases occurred in White Hart Court, Duke Street, Chelsea, near the river. A day or two afterwards, there was a case at 3, Harp Court, Fleet Street. The next case occurred on October 2nd, on board the hulk Justitia, lying off Woolwich; and the next to this in Lower Fore Street, Lambeth, three doors from where a previous case had occurred. The first thirteen cases were all situated in the localities just mentioned; and on October 5th there were two cases in Spitalfields.

Now, the people in Lower Fore Street, Lambeth, obtained their water by dipping a pail into the Thames, there being no other supply in the street. In White Hart Court, Chelsea, the inhabitants obtained water for all purposes in a similar way. A well was afterwards sunk in the court; but at the time these cases occurred the people had no other means of obtaining water, as I ascertained by inquiry on the spot. The inhabitants of Harp Court, Fleet Street, were in the habit, at that time, of procuring water from St. Bride’s pump, which was afterwards closed on the representation of Mr. Hutchinson, surgeon, of Farringdon Street, in consequence of its having been found that the well had a communication with the Fleet Ditch sewer, up which the tide flows from the Thames. I was informed by Mr. Dabbs, that the hulk Justitia was supplied with spring water from the Woolwich Arsenal; but it is not improbable that water was occasionally taken from the Thames alongside, as was constantly the practice in some of the other hulks, and amongst the shipping generally.

When the epidemic revived again in the summer of 1849, the first case in the sub-district “Lambeth; Church, 1st part,” was in Lower Fore Street, on June 27th; and on the commencement of the epidemic of the present year, the first case of cholera in any part of Lambeth, and one of the earliest in London, occurred at 52, Upper Fore Street, where also the people had no water except what they obtained from the Thames with a pail, as I ascertained by calling at the house. Many of the earlier cases this year occurred in persons employed amongst the shipping in the river, and the earliest cases in Wandsworth and Battersea have generally been amongst persons getting water direct from the Thames, or from streams up which the Thames flows with the tide. It is quite in accordance with what might be expected from the propagation of cholera through the medium of the Thames water, that it should generally affect those who draw it directly from the river somewhat sooner than those who receive it by the more circuitous route of the pipes of a water company.

London was without cholera from the latter part of 1849 to August 1853. During this interval an important change had taken place in the water supply of several of the south districts of London. The Lambeth Company removed their water works, in 1852, from opposite Hungerford Market to Thames Ditton; thus obtaining a supply of water quite free from the sewage of London. The districts supplied by the Lambeth Company are, however, also supplied, to a certain extent, by the Southwark and Vauxhall Company, the pipes of both companies going down every street, in the places where the supply is mixed, as was previously stated. In consequence of this intermixing of the water supply, the effect of the alteration made by the Lambeth Company on the progress of cholera was not so evident, to a cursory observer, as it would otherwise have been. It attracted the attention, however, of the Registrar-General, who published a table in the “Weekly Return of Births and Deaths” for 26th November 1853, of which the following is an abstract, containing as much as applies to the south districts of London.

=TABLE IV.=

┌─────────────┬─────────────────────┬───────────────────────────┬────────────┐ │ Water │ Sources of Supply. │ Aggregate of Districts │ Deaths in │ │ Companies. │ │ supplied chiefly by the │ 100,000 │ │ │ │ respective Companies. │inhabitants.│ ├─────────────┼─────────────────────┼────────────┬──────────────┼────────────┤ │ „ │ „ │ │ Deaths by │ │ │ │ │ │Cholera in 13 │ │ │ │ │ │ wks. ending │ │ │ │ │Population. │ Nov. 19. │ „ │ ├─────────────┼─────────────────────┼────────────┼──────────────┼────────────┤ │(1) Lambeth │Thames, at Thames │ │ │ │ │ and (2) │ Ditton and at │ │ │ │ │ Southwark │ Battersea │ │ │ │ │ and │ │ │ │ │ │ Vauxhall │ │ 346,363│ 211│ 61│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │Southwark and│Thames, at Battersea │ │ │ │ │ Vauxhall │ │ 118,267│ 111│ 94│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │(1) Southwark│Thames, at Battersea;│ │ │ │ │ and │ the Ravensbourne, │ │ │ │ │ Vauxhall, │ in Kent, & ditches │ │ │ │ │ (2) Kent │ and wells │ 17,805│ 19│ 107│ └─────────────┴─────────────────────┴────────────┴──────────────┴────────────┘

It thus appears that the districts partially supplied with the improved water suffered much less than the others, although, in 1849, when the Lambeth Company obtained their supply opposite Hungerford Market, these same districts suffered quite as much as those supplied entirely by the Southwark and Vauxhall Company, as was shown in table III, p. 62. The Lambeth water extends to only a small portion of some of the districts necessarily included in the group supplied by both Companies; and when the division is made a little more in detail, by taking sub-districts instead of districts, the effect of the new water supply is shown to be greater than appears in the above table. The Kent Water Company was introduced into the table by the Registrar-General on account of its supplying a small part of Rotherhithe. The following interesting remarks appeared, respecting this portion of Rotherhithe, in the “Weekly Return” of December 10, 1853:—

“London Water Supply.—The following is an extract from a letter which the Registrar-General has received from Mr. Pitt, the Registrar of Rotherhithe:—

“‘I consider Mr. Morris’s description of the part of the parish through which the pipes of the Kent Water Company were laid in 1849, is in the main correct; for though the Company had entered the parish, the water was but partially taken by the inhabitants up to the time of the fearful visitation in the above year.

“‘With respect to the deaths in 1849, they were certainly more numerous in the district now generally supplied by the Kent Company than in any other part of the parish. I only need mention Charlotte Row, Ram Alley, and Silver Street,—places where the scourge fell with tremendous severity.

“‘Among the recent cases of cholera, not one has occurred in the district supplied by the Kent Water Company.

“‘The parish of Rotherhithe has been badly supplied with water for many ages past. The people drank from old wells, old pumps, open ditches, and the muddy stream of the Thames.’

“In 1848–9 the mortality from cholera in Rotherhithe was higher than it was in any other district of London. This is quite in conformity with the general rule, that when cholera prevails, it is most fatal where the waters are most impure.”