"Testimony before the Parliamentary Select Committee on the Public Health Bill and Nuisances Removal Amendment Act on 5 March 1855"

View this document as a PDF

Benjamin Hall, Member of Parliament and (at the time) President of the second General Board of Health, chaired this Select Committee.

Para. 117. Chairman] [Benjamin Hall, concurrently the President of the General Board of Health] Do you practice as a medical man in the Metropolis?——Yes, in Sackville-street.

118. You wish to give some evidence upon the Nuisances Removal and Diseases Prevention Act?——I have been requested to give evidence on behalf of the tradespeople in the south districts of London more particularly.

119. Upon what point?——I received a request from Mr. Knight. I was asked if I would give evidence on behalf of the manufacturers whose interests are threatened by the Nuisances Removal Act. I have not seen the parties, nor learnt any particulars. From my printed publications they have learnt that my opinion is, that measures necessary to protect the public health would not interfere with useful trades; and I believe it is on that account that they have asked me to give evidence on their behalf, and I have expressed my willingness to do so.

120. To what points would you desire to draw the attention of the Committee as regards the sanitary question?——I have paid a great deal of attention to epidemic diseases, more particularly to cholera, and in fact to the public health in general; and I have arrived at the conclusion with regard to what are called offensive trades, that many of them really do not assist in the propagation of epidemic diseases, and that in fact they are not injurious to the public health. I consider that if they were injurious to the public health they would be extremely so to the workmen engaged in those trades, and as far as I have been able to learn, that is not the case; and from the law of diffusion of gases, it follows, that if they are not injurious to those actually on the spot, where the trades are carried on, it is impossible they should be so to persons further removed from the spot.

121. Are the Committee to understand, taking the case of bone-boilers, that no matter how offensive to the sense of smell the effluvia that comes from bone-boiling establishments may be, yet you consider that it is not prejudicial in any way to the health of the inhabitants of the district?——That is my opinion.

122. Mr Greene.] Does that extend to all animal substances?——No; I believe that epidemic diseases are propagated by special animal poisons coming from diseased persons, and causing the same diseases to others, and that they are extremely injurious; but that substances belonging to animals, that is to say, ordinary decomposing animal matter, will not produce disease in the human subject.

123. Do you apply that, also, to decaying vegetable matter; do you consider that that will not be productive of disease?——I do not believe that decaying vegetable matter would be productive of disease; at least, it is a matter open for discussion whether certain decomposing vegetable substances, in marshy districts, may not produce ague; but in London, in any trade I am acquainted with, I do not believe that any decomposing vegetable or animal matters produce disease.

124. Chairman.] Take the case of a bone-boiling establishment, or a knacker's yard; assuming that there is a large number of horses in a state of decomposition, from which of course there would be very offensive effluvia, as far as the sense of smell is concerned, do you apprehend that that would not be prejudicial to the health of the inhabitants round?——I believe not.

125. Mr. Adderley.] Have you never known the blood poisoned by inhaling putrid matter?——No; but by dissection wounds the blood may be poisoned.

126. Never by inhaling putrid matter?——No; gases produced by decomposition, when very concentrated, will produce sudden death; but where the person is not killed, if the person recovers, he has no fever or illness.

127. Mr. Egerton.] You mean to say, that the fact of breathing air which is tainted by decomposing matter, either animal or vegetable, will not be highly prejudicial to health?——I am not aware that it is, unless it be in such quantities as to produce actually fatal effects at the moment; but to produce those effects it requires that it should be highly concentrated.

128. Do not you know that the effect of breathing such tainted air often is to produce violent sickness at the time?——Yes, when the gases are in a very large quantity, as in a cesspool.

129. Do you mean to tell the Committee that when the effect is to produce violent sickness there is no injury produced to the constitution or health of the individual?——No fever or special disease.

130. Mr. Greene.] Are you not aware that persons going into vaults where there are a number of dead bodies have suffered very severely, and that sometimes death has been produced by this cause?——Yes, when those gases are extremely concentrated, they will actually poison a person and cause death, but not cause disease; those poisons do not reproduce themselves in the constitution.

.....

133. Mr. Egerton.] You say that the effluvia arising from living subjects are dangerous?——Or even from certain persons who have died from disease.

134. Mr. Wilkinson.] But not from the mere decay of animal matter?——Not from the mere decay of animal matter.

.....

138. Chairman.] I understand you to say that such effluvia, when highly concentrated, may produce vomiting, but that they are no injurious to health. How do you reconcile those two propositions?——If the vomiting were repeatedly produced, it would certainly be injurious to health. If a person was constantly exposed to decomposing matter, so concentrated as to disturb the digestive organs, it must be admitted that that would be injurious to health; but I am not aware that, in following any useful trade or manufacture, the effect is ever experienced.

.....

144. [Mr. Wilkinson questioning] Have you turned your attention to the effects of the late outbreak of cholera in London?——Yes, I have made special inquiries throughout Lambeth and Southwark and Newington.

145. Have you satisfied yourself by those inquiries of any particular results of that outbreak of cholera, so as to state your opinion if what has been the mode of propagation of the disease?——