89 PORT OF LONDON SANITARY COMMITTEE. ANNUAL REPORT of the MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH, To 31st December, 1933. Presented 14th June, 1934. REPORT For the Year ended 31st December, 1933, of the MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH for THE PORT OF LONDON (CHARLES FRANCIS WHITE, M.B., Ch.B., D.P. H.Vict., D.T.M.Liverpool). COLLETT, Mayor. A Common Council holden in the Chamber of the Guildhall of the City of London, on Thursday, the 14th day of June, 1934. THE Port of London Sanitary Committee did this day deliver into this Court a Report in writing under their hands of their proceedings, and submitting the Annual Report of the Medical Officer of Health of the Port to the 31st December, 1933; which was read. Ordered—That the Report be printed and a copy sent to every Member of this Court. BELL. To the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor, Aldermen and Commons of the City of London, in Common Council assembled. WE, whose names are hereunto subscribed, of your Port of London Sanitary Committee, to whom it has been referred to carry into execution the powers assigned to the Corporation, as the Port of London Sanitary Authority, beg to submit for the information of your Honourable Court the Annual Eeport of Dr. Charles Francis White, the Medical Officer of Health of the Port of London, for the year ended the 31st December, 1933, which Eeport contains a full and detailed account of the work done in the Port during that period by the Medical Officers and Inspectors. An Account of Eeceipts and Expenditure in connection with the Port of London Sanitary Authority for the year ended the 31st March, 1934, is appended, in accordance with the Order of your Honourable Court, for the information of the Court. All which we submit to the judgment of this Honourable Court. Dated this ninth day of June, 1934. Fred. Whittingham. Edgar H. Newton. John D. Laurie. R. W. Vice. J. S. Pearse. D. E. Williamson. John F. Bennet. J. Lockhart Gow. Geo. W. Jones. C. Archibald Chubb. Richard Brodie. C. R. Heiser. Port of London Sanitary Authority, 5, CHURCH PASSAGE, GUILDHALL, E.C.2. Telegraphic Address "PORTELTH LONDON." Telephone No. METROPOLITAN 3636. BOARDING STATIONS. RIVER THAMES Hulk "Hygeia," Gravesend. RIVER MEDWAY Garrison Point, Sheerness. Telegraphic Address "PORTELTH LONDON." Telephone No. (Hulk "Hygeia") - GRAVESEND 325. HOSPITAL FOR INFECTIOUS DISEASES at DENTON, near GRAVESEND. Telephone No. (Hospital) GRAVESEND 257. „ (Medical Officer) GRAVESEND 373. LIMITS OF THE PORT OF LONDON. The limits of the Port of London as at present defined commence at High-Water Mark in the River Thames at Teddington Lock, in the County of Surrey, and extend down both sides of the River Thames to an imaginary straight line dra wn from the Pilot Mark at the entrance of Havengore Creek, in the County of Essex, to the land's end at Warden Point, in the Isle of Sheppey, in the County of Kent, such point being the North-Western limit of the Port of Faversham, and extend up and include both sides of the River Medway to an imaginary straight line drawn from the South-East point of land westward of Coalmouth Creek, thence across the said River Medway to the Westernmost point of the piece of land which forms the Eastern side of the Stangate Creek, or, in other words, the North-West point of Fleet Marsh, and from thence in a Southerly direction to Iwade Church, in the said County of Kent, and thence in a North-Easterly direction to Elmley Chapel in the said Isle of Sheppey, a supposed direct line from Elmley Chapel to Iwade Church, being the Western limit of the Port of Faversham, and the said Port of London includes the Islands of Havengore Creek aforesaid, called Potton and Rushley Islands, and so much of the said Creek and watercourse as extends from it to the town of Rochford, and also includes all other islands, rivers, streams, creeks, waters, watercourses, channels, harbours, docks and places within the before-mentioned limits contained. 2 INDEX. A. page Actinomycosis in Ox Tongues 10,51 Action under Public Health (Imported Food) Regulations, 1925 51 Aliens Order, 1920 61 Ambulance Transport 25 Amount of Shipping Entering the Port (Table "A ") 12 Analyst's Reports 57-61 Animals (Importation) Order, 1930 63 „ (Landing from Ireland, Channel Islands and Isle of Man) Order, 1933 63 Assignment of Powers 50 B. Bacteriological Examinations 9, 25,56 Beef 52 Boarding Station 1, 10, 19 Bye-laws—Offensive Cargoes 10, 64 Bye-laws of Port Sanitary Authority 95 C. Canal Boats Acts and Regulations 65-69 Cargo Traffic (Table " B") 12 Caseous Lymphadenitis in Mutton 10, 51 Certificates—Fumigation Issued (Table "H") 44 Certificates under Public Health (Imported Food) Regulations, 1925 55 Change of Address Postcards 22 Chicken-pox 32 Chilled Beef from Australia 50 Cholera 9, 28 Classification of Nuisances (Table "J") 45 Cleaning Orders 9 Cleansing of Persons and Clothing 24 Confectionery 54 Crews' Spaces—Hygiene of 45 D. Dangerous Drugs 61 Declarations of Health 18 Deratisation Certificates (Table " H") 44 „ Exemption Certificates (Table" H") 44 Deratisation—Methods of 33 Destruction of Rats on Vessels (Table "E") 44 „ „ in Docks, Quays, &e. (Table " F") 44 „ „ on Vessels from Plague-infected Ports (Table " G") 44 Detection of Rodent Plague 9, 32 „ Infectious Disease on Vessels 9 Detention of Fat under Public Health (Imported Food) Regulations, 1925 52 „ Foodstuffs 52 Disinfection of Persons and Clothing 24 E. Exemption Certificates (Table "H") 44 Exportation Notices under Public Health (Imported Food) Regulations, 1925 55 F. Fats—Detention and Control under Public Health (Imported Food) Regulations, 1925 52 Fertilisers and Feeding Stuffs Act, 1926 55 Fish 53 Food Inspection 10, 45, 55 „ „ —Detentions and Seizures 52 Fruit 53 Fruit Pulp, &c. 58 „ Tinned and Bottled 53 Fumigation Certificates (Table " H") 44 „ of Vessels for Rat Destruction 10,33 3 G. PAGE Grain, &c. 54 H. Ham 52 Hospital 1,10,24 „ (new Works) 10 Houseboats 62 Hygiene of Crews' Spaces 45 I. Importation of Live Cattle 63 Imported Foodstuffs 10 Infected Ports—Vessels from (Table "G") 44 "Infected " Vessels (Table " G") 44 Infectious Disease, Detection of 9 „ Sickness Landed from Vessels (Table "C") 28 „ „ Occurring during Voyage (Table " D") 28 Infectious Disease, Prevention of Importation 21 Introduction 9-11 Infected Port List 18 Interment of Dead 27 L. Landing of Live Cattle 63 Legal Proceedings 10,63 Limits of Port of London 1 List of Infected Ports 18 M. Measures of Eat Destruction on Vessels from Plague-infected Ports (Table "G") 44 Medical Inspection of Aliens 61 Medical Inspection of Vessels 9, 12 Mooring Stations 21 Mutton—Caseous Lymphadenitis 10,51 Mutton and Lamb 52 N. Notice Boards 27 Notices of Exportation under Public Health (Imported Food) Regulations, 1925 55 Nuisances—Classification of (Table "J") 45 Nuts 54 O. Offal—Seized and Destroyed 52 Offensive Cargoes—Bye-laws 10,64 Offices 1 Official Certificates recognised under the Public Health (Imported Food) Regulations 55 Ox Tongues affected with Actinomycosis 10, 51 P. Paratyphoid 32 Parrots (Prohibition of Import) Regulations, 1930 9,65 Passenger Traffic (Table "B") 12 Plague 9,32 Pork 51,52 Port of London (Assignment of Powers) Order, 1933 50 Port of London, Limits of 1 Port Sanitary Regulations, 1933 9,16,26 Powers of Port Sanitary Authority 94 Prepared Foods, &c. 54 Provisions, &c. 54 4 PAGE Public Health (Deratisation of Ships) Regulations, 1929 9 „ „ (Imported Milk) Regulations, 1926 55 „ „ (Imported Food) Regulations, 1925 10,51, 55 „ „ „ „ „ —Notices served under Article II. (4) 55 „ „ „ Amendment Regulations, 1933 46,55 „ „ (Shellfish) Regulations, 1915 56 „ „ (Preservatives, &c., in Food) Regulations, 1925 to 1927 10,55 Pulmonary Tuberculosis 9 R. Rat Flea Investigation 40,43 Rat Proofing 35,40 Rats Destroyed on Vessels (Table "E") 44 „ „ in Docks, Quays, &c. (Table " F") 44 Rats Examined 9 Refrigerated Foods—Inspection of 47 Rodent Plague, Detection of 9,32 Routine Boarding of Ships 20 S. Samples 10, 56, 61 Sanitary Inspections 9 Sardines—Contamination by Lead 10 Scarlet Fever 9 Seizure of Foodstuffs 52 Shellfish 56 Shipping Entering the Port (Table "A") 12 Small-pox 28-32 Smoke Nuisance 9 Source of Water Supply 10,12-16 Staff 7,11 Statutory Notices 9 Structural Defects 9 Sulphur Fumigation of Unloaded Ships 34 Sundries (Foodstuffs, &c.) 54 Supervision of Contacts 22,25 Surveillance of Persons Landing 22 "Suspected" Vessels (Table "G") 44 T. Table "A" Shipping Entering the Port 12 „ "B" Cargo and Passenger Traffic 12 „ "C" Infectious Sickness Landed from Vessels 28 „ " D" „ „ occurring during Voyage 28 „ "E" Destruction of Rats on Vessels 44 „ "F" „ „ in Docks, Quays, &c. 44 „ "G" "Infected " or " Suspected " Vessels or Vessels from Plague-infected Ports 44 „ " H" Deratisation and Deratisation Exemption Certificates 44 „ "J" Classification of Nuisances 45 Tallow—Seized and Destroyed 52 Telegraphic Address 1 Telephone Numbers 1 Tinned Meats 52 Tonnage of Vessels Entering Port 9,12 Training Ships 9,63 Trapping 34 Tuberculosis, Pulmonary 9 U. Unsound Food, Disposal of 51 „ „ Quantity Destroyed 51,52 V. Vegetables 54 „ Tinned 54 Venereal Disease 26,27 Visitors to Port Sanitary District 65 W. Water Barges 10 „ Supply, Source of 10,12-16 Wireless Messages 20 5 INDEX TO APPENDICES. B. page Bacteriological Examination of Bats (Appendix XXIV.) 85 Bye-Laws (Appendix XXXII.) 94,95 C. Cerebro-Spinal Meningitis (Appendix XVIII.) 81 Certificates under International Sanitary Convention (Appendix XXV.) 85-88 Chicken-pox (Appendix XVII.) 80, 81 Cholera (Appendix III.) 71 Classification of Miscellaneous Diseases (Appendix XX.) 82 Crew Medically Inspected at Gravesend (Appendix I.) 70 „ „ „ Sheerness (Appendix I.) 70 D. Deratisation Certificates (Appendix XXV.) 85-88 „ Exemption Certificates (Appendix XXV.) 88 Destruction of Unsound Meat, Weights, &c. (Appendix XXIX.) 92 Diphtheria (Appendix VI.) 72 Diseases, Miscellaneous—see "M" (Appendix XX.) 82 Dock Areas (Appendix XXXI.) 93 Dysentery (Appendix XV.) 79 E. Enteric Fever (including Typhoid Fever and Paratyphoid Fever) (Appendix VII.) 73 Erysipelas (Appendix X.) 74 Exemption Certificates (Appendix XXVI.) 89 F. Fumigation of Vessels for the Destruction of Rats (Appendix XXVI.) 89 G. German Measles (Appendix IX.) 74 Gravesend—Medical Inspection at (Appendix I.) 70 H. Hospital—Cases Admitted and Cost of Maintenance, &c. (Appendix XXII.) 83 I. Infectious Disease (Appendix II.) 70 „ „ Cases Reported (Appendix II.) 70 „ „ „ Treated in Port Sanitary Hospital (Appendix II.) 70 Influenza (Appendix XIV.) 78, 79 International Sanitary Convention of Paris, 1926 (Appendix XXVI.) 89 M. Malaria (Appendix XVI.) 79,80 Measles (Appendix VIII.) 73,74 „ German (see "G") (Appendix IX.) 74 Medical Inspection—Gravesend and Sheerness (Appendix I.) 70 Miscellaneous Diseases Classified (Appendix XX.) 82 Mumps (Appendix XIX.) 81 6 N. PAGE New Buildings and Sanitary Works (Appendix XXX.) 93 Nuisances on Vessels (Appendix XXVII.) 90 „ the River (Appendix XXVII.) 90 „ Shore Premises (Appendix XXVIII.) 91 P. Paratyphoid Fever (Appendix VII.) 73 Passengers Medically Inspected—Gravesend (Appendix I.) 70 „ „ „ —Sheerness (Appendix I.) 70 Pneumonia (Appendix XIII.) 78 Powers (Appendix XXXII.) 94,95 Premises—Nuisances on (Appendix XXVIII.) 91 R. Rats Caught and Destroyed (Appendix XXIII.) 84 „ Examined (Appendix XXIV.) 85 „ —Fumigation of Vessels for Destruction of (Appendix XXV.) 85-88 River, Nuisances on (Appendix XXVII.) 90 S. Sanitary Inspections—Summary (Appendix XXVI.) 89 „ „ —Nuisances on Vessels (Appendix XXVII.) 90 „ „ — „ River (Appendix XXVII.) 90 „ „ — „ Shore Premises (Appendix XXVIII.) 91 Sanitary Works (Appendix XXX.) 93 Scarlet Fever (Appendix V.) 71, 72 Sheerness—Medical Inspection (Appendix I.) 70 Small-pox (Appendix IV.) 71 T. Tuberculosis, Pulmonary (Appendix XI.) 74-77 „ Other kinds (Appendix XII.) 77 Typhoid Fever (Appendix VII.) 73 U. Unsound Meat Destroyed, Weight, &c. (Appendix XXIX.) 92 V. Venerea] Diseases (Appendix XXI.) 83 Vessels Fumigated for Rats (Appendix XXV.) 85-88 „ —Nuisances on (Appendix XXVII.) 90 „ arriving from "Foreign " at Gravesend (Appendix I.) 70 „ „ „ „ Sheerness (Appendix I.) 70 W. Water Barges (Appendix XXVI.) 89 Weight, &c., of Unsound Meat Destroyed (Appendix XXIX.) 92 7 STAFF. List of Officers forming the Staff of the Port of London Sanitary Authority, 31st December, 1933. Office. Name of Officer. Date of entering the Service. Date of appointment to present position. MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH C. F. White, M.B., Ch.B., D.P.H.Vict., D.T.M. Liverpool. September, 1928 July, 1928. DEPUTY Col. J. S. Warrack, M.A., M.D., C.M.Aberdeen, D.P.H. Camb., Barrister-at-Law. April, 1903 February, 1916. BOARDING MEDICAL OFFICERS— Gravesend Surg. - Lieut. - Cmdr. H. M. Willoughby,M.R.C.S.,L.R.C.P., D.P.H., D.T.M. & H., R.N.V.R. May, 1929 May, 1929. Do, (Locum Tenens) †E. Kean, M.B., Ch.B., D.P.H. January, 1932 January, 1932. Do. Do. †S. C. Parry, M.A., M.R.C.S., L.R.C.P. October, 1933 November, 1933. Sheerness †H. A. Madwar, L.R.C.P., L.R.F.P.S. January, 1928 February, 1928. OFFICE STAFF— Principal Clerk E. A. Sorrell October, 1894 January, 1929. Principal Assistant W. C. Barham March, 1901 January, 1929. 1st Class „ J. A. Gillis March, 1914 January, 1929. 2nd „ „ A. W. Moore January, 1920 January, 1929. 3rd „ „ W. L. McLorg February, 1927 January, 1929. „ „ „ R. C. Ratliff March, 1930 March, 1930. Charwoman Mrs. E. Kail November, 1922 November, 1922. FOOD INSPECTORS, Grade 1(a) *W. J. Berry February, 1914 January, 1930. *F. J. Massie March, 1909 January, 1931. *R. Clifford July, 1925 September, 1932. SANITARY INSPECTORS,Grade 1(6) *P. R. Lambe January, 1900 January, 1929. *W. Elward March, 1909 January, 1929. *W. Gray September, 1921 January, 1930. *P. W. Coombe December, 1924 October, 1931. *E. H. Johnson August, 1929 January, 1933. SANITARY INSPECTORS, Grade II... *T. G. Edwards June, 1929 January, 1930. *D. E. Madeley September, 1932 September, 1932. C. E. Wright July, 1931 January, 1933. J. S. Beattie May, 1931 April, 1933. ASSISTANT RAT OFFICERS C. F. Woodrow November, 1928 November, 1928. P. J.Wilkins November, 1928 November, 1928. C. W. Moody February, 1929 February, 1929. E. C. Watkins May, 1929 May, 1929. S. A. Croft May, 1929 May, 1929. G. F. Boult May, 1929 May, 1929. DENTON HOSPITAL— Medical Officer in Charge Col. J. S. Warrack April, 1903 February, 1916. Matron J. Jackson February, 1910 February, 1910. Staff Nurse † — — Senior Assistant Nurse † — — Assistant Nurse † — — Cook-General † — — Wardmaid † — — Wardmaid † — — Housemaid † - — Handyman, &c F. R. Wenham June, 1929 June, 1929. Laundress B. A. Wenham June, 1929 June, 1929. Gardener W. H. James January, 1931 December, 1930. 8 STAFF—continued. List of Officers forming the Staff of the Port of London Sanitary Authority, 31st December, 1933. Office. Name of Officer. Date of entering the Service. Date of appointment to present position. LAUNCHES— "Howard Deighton” and "Joseph White"— Master C. A. Strange December, 1898 December, 1930. 1st Mate C. H. Price May,1912 December, 1930. 2nd Mate A. J. Humphreys April, 1931 March, 1931. Chief Engineer R. J. Roberts April, 1931 October, 1931. Engineer F. H. Yeo August, 1932 August, 1932. „ A. V. Ryder August, 1932 August, 1932. Deckhand J. R. Steen March, 1926 December, 1930. „ H. J. Debnam April, 1931 April, 1931. „ A. F. Clements January, 1927 September, 1933. Boy †L. J. Youngs April, 1931 April, 1931. „ †S. G. Twocock February, 1932 February, 1932. „ †W. G. A. King November, 1933 November, 1933. "James Howell"— Master A. F. Rough November, 1914 December, 1930. Engineer A. E. Howard February, 1912 September, 1933. Boy †B. J. Smith August, 1933 August, 1933. GREENWICH MOORINGS— Barge " Ella Vicars"— Watchmen E. Ditch January, 1915 November, 1917. J, C. Row January, 1927 August, 1932. GRAVESEND—Hulk “Hygeia”— Shipkeepers H. A. Clarkson May, 1912 January, 1927. †E. W. S. Edmonds September, 1933 September, 1933. * These Inspectors possess the Special Certificate of the Royal Sanitary Institute for Inspectors of Food. † Temporary Staff. 9 5, Church Passage, Guildhall, E.C. 2, January, 1934. TO THE WORSHIPFUL THE PORT OF LONDON SANITARY COMMITTEE. Gentlemen, I have the honour to submit my Annual Report as Medical Officer of Health of the Port of London. In Memo. 174/S.A. (Port and Riparian Authorities—Annual Reports of Medical Officers of Health) the Ministry of Health have requested information under the various headings which appear in the text. I have endeavoured to describe clearly the measures you have adopted to give effect to the new Port Sanitary Regulations which came into force on 1st May, 1933; to prevent the importation of infectious diseases; to keep the Port free from rodent plague; to supervise the hygiene of crew accommodation in ships and to ensure that imported food which is diseased, unsound or unwholesome is not disposed of for human consumption. I have included a Paper on "The Rat-proofing of Ships " and another on the "Inspection of Refrigerated Foods," which I read during the year before the Association of Port Sanitary Authorities and the British Association of Refrigeration respectively, as these have a direct bearing on your administration. The tonnage of vessels entering the Port of London during 1933 was 28,095.284 tons, being 1,239,347 tons more than that for the previous year. Of the 13,575 vessels arriving from foreign ports, 1,600 were boarded and inspected by your Medical Officers. Three hundred and fifteen vessels arrived on which there had occurred during the voyage a total of 388 cases of infectious disease. This total included 148 cases of Pulmonary Tuberculosis, of which 111 were passengers and 37 seamen on articles. The only infectious sickness occurring in the Training Ships during the year was Scarlet Fever, of which there were 16 cases. No case of Plague arrived and no Plague-infected rats were found in ships or on shore in the Port. Six hundred and fifty rats from ships and 1,377 from shore premises were bacteriologically examined, but in no case was there any suspicion of Plague infection. One vessel arrived in which a case of Cholera had died at sea and four vessels arrived from which cases of Small-pox had been landed abroad. Under the Parrots (Prohibition of Import) Regulations, 1930, 117 Notices were issued in respect of 394 parrots, &c.; 213 were admitted under Ministry of Health permits, 160 were exported and 21 destroyed. In addition, 7 parrots were reported as having died in vessels during the voyage, the bodies being destroyed before arrival in the Port. Your Sanitary Inspectors made 15,381 inspections of vessels and 6,169 inspections of shore premises. Orders to cleanse crew quarters were made on 2,263 vessels, and it was found necessary to call for structural alterations and repairs to 407 vessels. Orders to remedy structural defects were made in respect of 53 premises. Twenty-three Statutory Notices were served on Masters of ships in respect of smoke nuisance. The Public Health (Deratisation of Ships) Regulations, 1929, were repealed by the Port Sanitary Regulations, 1933, which came into operation on the 1st May, 1933. Under these Regulations, a total of 1,027 Certificates were issued; 136 Certificates of Deratisation and 891 Certificates of Exemption from Deratisation. 10 The number of vessels fumigated for rat destruction under the supervision of your Inspectors was 135; 68 by Sulphur Dioxide and 67 by Hydrogen Cyanide. By the former method 905 rats and 231 mice and by the latter 1,281 rats and 227 mice were destroyed. The average number of rats killed per fumigation was 16. If mice are taken into consideration also, the average number of rodents destroyed by fumigation was 19. In addition, 1,736 rats were trapped in ships and 4,911 on shore in the Port. The former figure shows a decrease of 378 and the latter a decrease of 687 rats as compared with the previous year. This is due to the decline in the rat population of ships and the dock estate, and not to any relaxation of rat repressive measures. Intimation Notices were served in respect of 6 cases of infringement of the Bye-laws relating to Offensive Cargoes. In each instance the offender took such steps as to render further action unnecessary. The arrangements made with the Port of London Authority, whereby the annual re-registration of Water Barges was made conditional upon the satisfactory report from your Officers as to the fitness of the barges for the carriage of drinking water, worked smoothly and efficiently during the year. Of 13 Water Barges, 2 were put out of service and 1 new barge was placed in commission, leaving 12 in service at the end of the year. The arrangements made by your Worshipful Committee for the prompt inspection of vessels having sickness on board or arriving from infected ports were easily adapted to the new Port Sanitary Regulations which came into operation on 1st May. The boarding launch "Howard Deighton" has given satisfactory service during the year and has greatly facilitated the work of your Boarding Medical Officers and the safe and speedy removal of cases of infectious sickness to your Hospital at Denton. In addition, the launch has been able to render valuable assistance in the landing of several cases of serious illness and accident. Owing to the water from the well in your Hospital becoming brackish, it was necessary to pipe in the supplv of the Gravesend and Milton Water Works Companv. The supply from the well is still kept available for use on the garden, drain flushing, &c. The condition of the grounds surrounding the Hospital has been further improved. The inspection of imported foodstuffs is an important part of the work of the Authority, and during the year 1,303 tons of foodstuffs were condemned as unfit for human consumption and were either destroyed or disposed of for industrial purposes. The proportion of carcases of mutton examined for Caseous Lymphadenitis remained at 5 per cent. throughout the year; pieces of mutton continued to be subjected to 100 per cent, examination. A proportion of frozen ox-tongues imported from South America was examined on arrival, the percentage found to be affected with Actinobacillosis being 0.94. Special chemical and bacteriological examinations of the water supply at the Tilbury Docks were undertaken, and showed that the water in the mains was excellent. It appears, however, that the water may deteriorate bacteriologically during its passage from the quayside hydrants to the ships' tanks, and also in the tanks themselves. This matter is dealt with in detail in this Report. A large number of samples of sardines were examined chemically for contamination by lead. This question is receiving the close attention of the Portuguese packers of sardines, and steps are being taken to prevent contamination in future packs. A considerable number of other samples were taken under the Public Health (Imported Food) and (Preservatives, &c., in Food) Regulations, the results of analyses being given in detail on pages 56-61. Legal proceedings were not taken in regard to any foodstuffs, as merchants voluntarily surrendered everything found to be unsound or unfit for human consumption, and there was no instance of any deliberate attempt to import food in contravention of any of the Public Health Regulations. 11 During the year all grades of your Staff carried out their duties in a highly satisfactory manner. Dr. Kidd retired on superannuation after 25 years' service as a Boarding Medical Officer and Mr. Lambe retired similarly after 34 years' service as a Sanitary Inspector. The ripe experience of these officers has been very valuable, but you have senior officers capable of taking their places and junior officers whose ability and keenness will ensure that the standard of work is maintained. The health work of so large a Port could not be carried out by a comparatively small Staff without the co-operation of the Officers of His Majesty's Customs, the Port of London Authority, the Pilots and the members of the Staffs of the Shipping Companies and Merchants, and their assistance and courtesy is gratefully acknowledged. I have the honour to be, Gentlemen, Your obedient Servant, CHARLES F. WHITE. 12 I.—AMOUNT OF SHIPPING ENTERING THE PORT DURING THE YEAR 1933. Table A. Number. Tonnage. Number By the Medical Officer of Health. Inspected. By the Sanitary Inspector. Number reported to be Defective. Number of Vessels on which Defects were Remedied. Number of Vessels reported as having or having had, during the voyage Infectious Disease on Board. Foreign Steamers 9,708 16,181.600 1,433 11,881 2,081 1,979 300 *Motor 3,673 4,771,842 167 — Sailing 193 120,083 — 144 18 15 — Fishing — — — — — — — Total Foreign 13,575 21,073,525 1,600 12,025 2,099 1,994 300 Coastwise - Steamers 10,517 6,640,034 3 1,535 408 373 7 *Motor 1,538 243,019 — — Sailing 1,800 138,706 — 229 45 36 — Fishing — — — — — — Total Coastwise 13,855 7,021,759 3 1,764 453 409 7 Total Foreign and Coastwise 27,430 28,095,284 1,603 13,789 2,552 2,403 307 Inland Navigation — — 1 1,592 85 85 8 *Includes mechanically propelled vessels other than Steamers. See also Appendix I. Note.—British Fishing Vessels are excluded from the Returns of the Navigation of the United Kingdom. Foreign Fishing Vessels are included, but not separately distinguished. II.—CHARACTER OF TRADE OF PORT. Table B. (a) Passenger Traffic during 1933:— To and from NON-EUROPEAN Countries. Number of Passengers. 1st Class. 2nd Class. 3rd Class. Tourist. Inwards 16,738 9,249 11,163 8,162 Outwards 18,166 6,849 7,808 5,806 To and from CONTINENT OF EUROPE. Inwards 61,733 (including 2,237 Transmigrants). Outwards 61,193. Countries from which passengers principally arrive: North America, Australia, Europe, British South Africa, India and the Far East. (b) Cargo Traffic:— Principal Imports—Merchandise of all kinds, principally Provisions, Fruit, Grain and Flour, Hides and Skins, Meat, Oil and Fats, Rubber, Textile Materials, Tobacco, Wood and Wool. Principal Exports—Manufactured Goods of all kinds. Countries with which the Port principally trades—The Port of London trades with all parts of the world. III.—SOURCE OF WATER SUPPLY. (a) For the Port:— In all the docks, except Tilbury, water is supplied by the Metropolitan Water Board. Tilbury Docks take water from the South Essex Water Company. The majority of the wharves are supplied by the Public Water Companies within whose areas of distribution they are situated, but several have their own deep wells and some have no water available for ships, in which case any water required may be obtained from water boats. (b) For Shipping:— Ships usually obtain water from the shore supplies as indicated above, but when no water is available at the berth or if a ship is lying at moorings in the river, supplies are obtained from water boats. 13 (c) Number of water boats and their sanitary condition:— Inspector Madeley, who carried out during the year an enquiry into the water supply to ships in the Port, says:— "There are twelve water boats working in the Port. All are of steel construction and of the 'single skin' type, i.e., the skin of the boat forms the sides and bottom of the tanks and the deck forms the top. The manholes are raised from 6 inches to 1 foot above the level of the deck and the steel covers are fitted with locks and should be secured whenever the boat is unattended, to prevent unauthorised persons dipping water from the tanks in buckets which may be dirty. Each boat should be provided with a small domestic tank for use of the crew, as otherwise they will obtain water from the main tank usually by lowering a bucket into it. Manhole covers should have proper filling caps, so that there is no need to open the tanks during loading. It is particularly undesirable that the manhole covers of tanks should be opened when a water boat is lying alongside a ship, as there is risk of foul water from the ship's scuppers being accidentally discharged into the tanks. For the same reason all hoses not actually in use should be kept under cover. It is the usual practice to clean tanks every three months and to cement-wash them every six months, and the boats come under the supervision of your Inspectors at these times." All water boats must be registered annually with the Port of London Authority, and before a certificate is granted they must be inspected as to their fitness for navigation in the river and docks. The Port of London Authority notify the Port Sanitary Authority when water boats are coming up for re-registration, and will not issue a certificate to any water boat until your Medical Officer has certified that it is fit for the carriage of drinking water. This arrangement has now worked quite smoothly for several years, and has enabled your Officers to get repairs and improvements carried out without difficulty. Special Inquiries in regard to Water Supply. During August there occurred on board a ship in the Mediterranean a number of cases of enteritis. The possibility of the water on board being contaminated was considered, and samples examined bacteriologically at two ports abroad were unfavourably reported upon. This water was taken on in the Port of London, but on enquiry was found to have been derived from a large public supply, which is kept under the closest supervision and in regard to which there had been no other complaint, though it is distributed over a very large area ashore. However, a thorough investigation was carried out by a Medical Officer and a Chemist, representing the Shipping Company concerned, the Bacteriologist to the Water Company, the Medical Officer of the Port of London Authority and myself. The situation of the mains and hydrants was carefully inspected, and there appeared to be no risk of contamination. Three samples were drawn from each of the following points : a tap on the main in the meter house; the hydrant on the quay where the ship referred to had taken on water; the same hydrant after sterilisation; the end of a length of hose, as used for supplying ships, attached to this hydrant; a tap on an adjacent quay. The three series of samples were submitted to three different Bacteriologists. All the samples were reported as satisfactory except that from the end of the hose. This contained "coliform" organisms, but no typical bacilli coli. The hose was ordinary canvas hose, which is handled and stored with reasonable care. It therefore appears that coliform organisms may gain access to pure water during its passage along a length of hose from a hydrant ashore to a ship. These organisms will, under favourable conditions, multiply during storage in the ship's tanks. The question then arises as to the hygenic significance of these coliform bacilli. They are not pathogenic, but they are regarded by Bacteriologists as indicating the possibility of dangerous contamination. Their importance can only be gauged in association with the results of chemical examination and some knowledge of the source of the water. Actually the bacteriologists abroad did not, in this instance, differentiate between coliform organisms and typical bacilli coli. It is suggested that this distinction should always be made, and that in the absence of typical bacilli coli, Bacteriologists should not unhesitatingly condemn a sample of water from a ship simply because coliform organisms are present. It is right that they should express some doubt in regard to the sample, but they should indicate that their findings are not conclusive and that they could only express a definite opinion if they were in possession of data as to the source of supply and the possibilities of pollution. It is probable that coliform 14 organisms would be found in the majority of samples of water from ships, yet outbreaks of water-borne disease on shipboard are very rare. It is very doubtful whether the outbreak of enteritis in this ship was due to the water supply, and it is certain that the water as supplied in the Port of London was above suspicion. Nevertheless, it is desirable that the water in the tanks of ships should be as pure as the water in the mains ashore from which they are filled, and consideration has been given to the elimination of possible sources of contamination. The Port of London Authority have issued instructions that water-mains in the docks are to be flushed regularly from the lowest point; men are to be specially detailed for the watering of ships and are to be instructed in the hygiene of their duties by the Authority's Medical Officer; hose-pipes with any leaks are on no account to be used; hose-pipes are not to be dragged along the quay, but are to be conveyed in hand-carts or on wheels so as to avoid contamination from the ground; quays are to be cleaned regularly, and proper facilities for the drying of hoses are to be provided where they do not already exist. The water supplies to the docks are of the highest degree of purity; ordinary care has always been exercised in delivering water to ships but, with the special precautions now instituted, the Dock Authority are doing everything practicable to ensure that the water as delivered into the ships' tanks is bacteriologically satisfactory. The condition of the tank is the business of the shipping companies. Again reasonable care is taken in the cleaning and cement-washing of tanks, but if the water on board is to be judged by the strictest bacteriological standards, then either the cleaning of tanks must be carried out with all the precautions observed in H.M. Navy or some system of water sterilization must be installed on board. The latter procedure is worthy of consideration for large passenger liners, particularly those which have to take water at many different ports. During the autumn, Inspector Madeley carried out a special enquiry into the supply of water to ships lying not only in the docks but also at river-side Wharves in the Port and made a valuable report, which is much too lengthy to reproduce here, but from which a number of observations of special interest may be quoted. Arrangements ashore.—Hydrants are nearly always situated at or below groundlevel and as near the edge of the quay as possible, so as to avoid interference with the handling of cargo and to minimise risk of damage to hose. The pit in which the hydrant is situated should be rendered with cement and should be drained so that dirty water cannot lodge in it. Wherever possible, hydrants should be above ground. Tt has been suggested that they should be led up the centre of mooring bollards. If there are hydrants at short intervals along the quays, less hose is necessary and therefore risk of contamination is reduced. Plain canvas hose is unsatisfactory; rubber-lined canvas is much better, stout rubber hose is best, but is expensive and heavy. Hoses are frequently subjected to unnecessary strain by kinking. One of the principal places where this occurs is on the ship's rail or fish plate as the hose bends over to enter the tank or filling pipe. This might easily be avoided by fitting over the rail or fish plate a wooden shoe in which the hose might rest. Hose should never be allowed to dip into dock or river water. There should always be special provision for the drying and storage of hose-pipes. Arrangements in Ships.—In the majority of home-trade and coasting steamers the fresh-water tank is situated on the top of the engine-room casing abaft the funnel with a draw-off tap in the galley below. This is the most suitable situation when it is not necessary to carry a large quantity of water. A few have the water-tank on the main deck abaft the main hatch. This is a very exposed position and in one case in which there was no tap, water being obtained by lifting the manhole cover, so much sea water had got in as to make the fresh-water supply too brackish for use. One motor coasting vessel less than a year old was discovered to have two galvanized iron water tanks to neither of which was there any means of access for 15 cleaning. Foreign-going steamers of the tramp class have their fresh-water tanks fitted in the bridge space or shelter deck with a hand-pump on deck. This position is satisfactory, but care should be taken to lead the sounding pipes and filling pipes to some suitable place on deck. Fore and after peak tanks are unsatisfactory for fresh water as on account of their shape they are difficult to clean and cement wash properly. Many tanks in all classes of vessels were inspected as to cleanliness, and rarely was any cause of complaint found. A tank in good condition which has not received contaminated water will not require cleaning more than once in twelve months, though it should be drained to get rid of residual water and sediment whenever the opportunity occurs. Men engaged in cleaning tanks wear overalls and their ordinary boots. It is suggested that they should wear rubber boots kept specially for use in fresh-water tanks. Manholes should have a water-tight joint of rubber or asbestos packing. In two instances manhole doors were found to be jointed with white lead and in one instance with red lead. When tanks are situated in the bridge space or the shelter dock or in the open, it is desirable that the manhole should be on the side and not at the top, so as to give easy access for cleaning and to ensure that the covers are properly fitted after being removed. Various types of water filters are found in ships. For the most part they will remove sediment and clarify the water, but they will not remove bacterial contamination. Except in the large passenger liners, which are fitted with batteries of carbon block filters on the rising main between the pump and the gravity tank and in regard to which special instructions as to cleansing are issued by the makers, there is usually no appreciation of the fact that a dirty filter is more dangerous than no filter at all. Filling pipes, sounding pipes and air pipes are frequently terminated in a manner and in a situation involving risk of contamination of the water in the tanks. Thus in the majority of cargo vessels filling pipes terminate flush with the deck and are closed with a brass screw cap. When a tank is being filled it is usual to insert the nozzle of the hose into the pipe. If the air pipe is small, there is regurgitation through the filling pipe, the surrounding deck is flooded and some at least of the dirty water finds its way into the tank. Sometimes the brass cap is missing and it is replaced by a wooden plug which may be a poor fit. Risk of contamination would be reduced if filling pipes terminated in a protected situation well above deck level. In passenger ships it is more commonly the sounding pipes which are at fault. Thus in one first-class liner the sounding pipes to a pair of fresh-water tanks terminate in a gentlemen's lavatory compartment on the port side and in a ladies' lavatory compartment on the starboard side. The end of the pipe in each case is in a little depression in the floor of the compartment. It is the usual practice for the carpenter to sound every tank in the ship twice a day and report to the Chief Officer. The carpenter uses a steel rod about four feet long attached to a length of spun yarn. This he lowers into the tank, pulls it out, records the depth, wipes the rod on a piece of waste and lowers it into the next tank. Fresh-water tanks, salt-water tanks and the bilges are all sounded with the same rod one after the other. In between tanks the rod is frequently trailed along the deck. Though water-borne disease is very uncommon in ships, it is apparent from Mr. Madeley's report that there are many circumstances sufficient to account for unsatisfactory bacteriological reports, and much might be done by attention to detail to reduce the risks of contamination. 16 Mr. Madeley concludes with the following recommendations:— 1. Particular attention should be paid to the situation of filling pipes, sounding pipes and air pipes to fresh-water tanks. They should be placed in as sheltered a position as possible and under no circumstances should they terminate flush with the deck. For filling and sounding pipes consideration should be given to some form of patent cap which can only be opened by lifting a lever. When the lever is released the pipe is closed and locked. 2. Main filters should be cleaned regularly in accordance with the manufacturers' instructions. Much greater attention should be given to small filters. 3. Manholes to main storage tanks should whenever possible be placed on the side of the tanks. If the manhole must be on the top of the tank it should be raised above the tank top by a coaming or saddle piece. Jointing of manhole covers should be by rubber insertion or other approved jointing material. 4. In coasting vessels a tank on the main deck is dangerous and should be removed to a more suitable position. A draw-off tap should always be provided. 5. Subsidiary tanks (when present) should receive greater attention both as regards position and cleanliness. 6. Arrangements should be made for fresh-water tanks to be sounded separately from salt-water tanks and bilges. IV.—PORT SANITARY REGULATIONS, 1933. At your Meeting on the 10th March, I reported to your Worshipful Committee as follows:— POET SANITARY EEGULATIONS, 1933. These new Eegulations will come into operation on 1st May, 1933, and are designed to consolidate in one code the whole of the regulations relating to the control of conditions liable to lead to the spread of infectious disease from or to ships in ports in England and Wales. They revoke the Eegulations issued in 1907, relating to Cholera, Yellow Fever and Plague in ships from foreign ports, coastwise ships and outward bound ships, and also the Port Sanitary Authorities (Infectious Diseases) Eegulations, 1920, and the Public Health (Deratisation of Ships) Eegulations, 1929. The definition of the terms "infected ship "and" suspected ship" in relation to Cholera, Plague and Yellow Fever respectively are amended in accordance with the International Sanitary Convention, 1926, and the sanitary measures prescribed in regard to such ships, and also to any in which Typhus Fever or Small-pox has occurred, are precisely as laid down in the International Sanitary Convention. The Port Sanitary Authorities (Infectious Diseases) Eegulations, 1926, and the Public Health (Deratisation of Ships) Eegulations, 1929, appear practically unaltered as part of the new Eegulations. There are, however, a number of new and important provisions. In the first place, the Master of a foreign-going ship approaching a port in England or Wales is required to ascertain the state of health of all persons on board and to fill in and sign a Declaration of Health in the prescribed form. Thus, the Master will not, in future, be able to plead as an excuse for failure to notify sickness that he was not aware of any case of illness aboard his ship. It will be his duty to ascertain whether all are in good health and, if not, to notify the Port Sanitary Authority, unless he is satisfied that no question of infection or the spread of infectious disease is involved. The Declaration of Health sets out the symptoms which should lead a Master to suspect that a case of illness is one of the notifiable infectious diseases. The definition of a "foreign-going ship" does not include ships trading between ports in Great Britain and ports on the continent of Europe between the Eiver Elbe and Brest. The Masters of such ships are thus exempted from the above requirements. It is obvious that the Masters of packet-boats to and from the Continent could not comply, but I fail to see why this concession should be extended to cargo vessels. The Eegulations provide that, in ports where there are arrangements for the reception by the Port Sanitary Authority of wireless messages, the Minister is prepared to publish in the "London Gazette" a notice that ships which are equipped with wireless transmitting apparatus and which require the attention of the Port Medical Officer shall send to the Port Sanitary Authority, not more than twelve and not less than four hours before the expected time of arrival of the ship, a wireless message giving the necessary information. Such an arrangement has been in operation, on a voluntary basis, in the Port of London 17 for the past two years, but it will now be desirable to apply to the Minister for a declaration officially putting this arrangement into operation in this Port. It will further be necessary for the sake of uniformity to change the telegraphic address of the Port Sanitary Authority for the purposes of such messages from "Hygeia Gravesend " to " Portelth London." New instructions are issued in regard to the "Flags and Signal Lights" to be shown by ships as indications of the health conditions on board. The Port Sanitary Authority are required to establish, with the concurrence of the Customs Officer and the Harbour Master, one or more "mooring stations" within the docks where ships can, if necessary, be isolated. Similarly, a mooring station outside the docks must be established, if local conditions permit. "Infected" of "suspected" ships must be taken to a mooring station, unless the Medical Officer of Health otherwise directs. The Medical Officer of Health must prepare and keep up-to-date a list of ports which are infected or suspected to be infected with Plague (human or rodent), Cholera, Yellow Fever, Typhus or Small-pox, and must supply Pilots and Customs Officers with such list and any amendments thereto. Owing to the difficulties of notifying Pilots and Customs Officers promptly of changes in the list of infected ports, I propose to continue the present practice of issuing a list which includes the ports of all countries in which these diseases are endemic or, from time to time, epidemic. I hope also to be permitted to print this list on the Declaration of Health. As formerly, pratique, i.e., permission for a ship to have free communication with the shore, can only be granted by an Officer of H.M. Customs. A Customs Officer on boarding a ship must, therefore, peruse the Declaration of Health and may make any further enquiries. If, in consequence, he is of the opinion that the health conditions of the ship require investigation by the Port Medical Officer, or if the ship has sailed from or called at any port on the list of infected ports or is for any other reason subject to the special instructions of the Medical Officer of Health, the Customs Officer must detain such ship until it has been medically inspected, and such inspection must be carried out within twelve hours. If the Port Medical Officer boards a ship before the Customs Officer he may take such steps as are indicated by the health conditions on board, and notify the Customs Officer when there are no medical reasons for withholding pratique. No person other than the Pilot, Customs Officer, Immigration Officer or officer of the Port Sanitary Authority may board or leave a ship without the permission of the Medical Officer of Health until it is free from control under these Regulations. The Medical Officer may make the granting of such permission conditional upon the person concerned giving his name, intended destination and address and any other information reasonably required for the purpose of these Regulations. If Plague (human or rodent), Cholera, Yellow Fever, Typhus or Small-pox occurs on board a ship after it has arrived in the Port, the Medical Officer of Health may, if he thinks fit, order the removal of the ship to a mooring station. The Medical Officer of Health is empowered to board any ship, examine any person who is suffering from or may have been exposed to infectious disease, or who is believed to be verminous, and may order such isolation of persons on board or ashore and such measures of disinfection as he deems necessary. The Master of a ship is required to notify the occurrence of infectious disease on board, to answer all health questions and to render such assistance as may be reasonably required. The Medical Officer of Health may examine any person proposing to embark on a ship whom he suspects to be suffering from Plague, Cholera, Yellow Fever, Typhus or Small-pox, and prohibit their embarkation, if necessary. He may also prohibit the embarkation of persons who are contacts with the severe type of Small-pox or who have come from a district where this disease exists. If the Minister of Health has declared a district in England or Wales to be infected with Plague, Cholera, Yellow Fever, Typhus or Small-pox, the Medical Officer of Health of the port concerned has certain other obligations for the protection of ships within such port. Where, under these Regulations, the Master of a ship is required to carry out measures for the prevention of the spread of infection the Port Sanitary Authority may, at the request of the Master and if they think fit, at his cost, carry out such measures on his behalf, but if any charges are so made they must not exceed the cost incurred by the Authority, and must not in any case exceed Twenty Pounds unless notice of the charge has been given to the Master before the commencement of the work. The officers of the Port Sanitary Authority must enforce and execute the Regulations in so far as they are directed so to do by the Port Sanitary Authority. It is, therefore, necessary for your Worshipful Committee to give the appropriate directions. These Regulations will certainly be welcomed by all Port Sanitary Authorities, for they will bring quarantine administration in this country up-to-date, and should make it as nearly uniform as is practicable in the ports of the United Kingdom. I still look forward to the day when it will be possible to abolish the routine medical inspection of ships from infected ports and to substitute a compulsory declaration, not only of the occurrence of infectious disease or of illness suspected to be of an infectious nature, but also of sickness occurring during the voyage, the nature of which is uncertain, of deaths from any cause and of illness of any sort whatever which exists on board at the time of arrival of the ship in port. I have put forward such a scheme in detail, but it has not yet found acceptance. Your Worshipful Committee resolved to:— 1. Direct the members of your Staff to execute and enforce these Regulations and declare all your Sanitary Officers to be authorised officers for the purposes of these Regulations, with the proviso that only your Medical Officer of Health or, in his absence, the Medical Officer authorised to act in his place, shall perform the duties imposed by these Regulations in relation to the signing and issuing of certificates and statements. 2. Apply to the Minister of Health for a declaration putting Article 6 (dealing with wireless messages) into operation in the Port of London. 18 Arrangements for dealing with Declarations of Health. Ships bound for London coming up the English Channel take on a pilot off Dungeness, those coming across the North Sea take on a pilot at the Sunk Lightship, near Harwich. The Elder Brethren of Trinity House kindly agreed that pilots should deliver copies of the Declaration of Health to the Masters of the ships they boarded, but stipulated that pilots should not be held responsible for any failure on the part of the Masters to comply with the instructions of the Port Sanitary Authority. Accordingly supplies of the form of Declaration of Health are sent from time to time as necessary to Trinity House, whence they are sent to the Pilot Stations for distribution. Although the pilots accept no responsibility they have co-operated willingly and conscientiously, and consequently the arrangements are working satisfactorily. The Customs Officers at Gravesend and Sheerness are kept supplied with Declarations of Health, as also are the Boarding Medical Officers and the Sanitary Inspectors. When the Eegulations first came into force copies of the Declaration of Health were sent to the Shipping Companies having vessels trading regularly into London, for distribution to their ships, but since the pilots have played their part so well there have been no calls for renewal of these supplies. The instructions to Masters are printed on page 4 of the Declaration of Health, and are as follows:— INSTRUCTIONS. The Master of a foreign-going ship approaching a Port in England or Wales from a Foreign Port must ascertain the state of health of all persons on board and fill in and sign a Declaration of Health in the prescribed form. If the answer to any of the questions on page 1 is "YES," or if the ship has sailed from, or during the voyage called at, any of the following Ports:— Ports in ASIA, including JAPAN, the EAST INDIES and CEYLON, AFRICA, including MADAGASCAR, the CANARY ISLANDS and CAPE VERDE ISLANDS, TURKEY, GREECE, BLACK SEA, AZORES, SOUTH AMERICA, CENTRAL AMERICA, GULF OF MEXICO, WEST INDIES free pratique will not be granted by His Majesty's Customs until the vessel has been visited by the Port Medical Officer. The Master must therefore:— (1) Send a wireless message to "PORTELTH," LONDON, stating the name of his vessel and the time* she is expected to arrive off Gravesend. This message must be sent off not more than 12 hours and not less than 4 hours before the arrival of the ship. (If wireless is not carried the Port Sanitary Authority must be notified of the arrival of the ship as soon as possible.) (2) By day, when within the Port of London, hoist the flag signal L I M, meaning Port Medical Officer required; By night, when approaching Gravesend, flash letter " Q " repeatedly from the morse lamp. (3) Be prepared to muster the crew for inspection by the Port Medical Officer. (4) In the case of vessels bound for the Medway, the wireless message must be sent to "PORTELTH," LONDON, but must be as follows:— "(Name of vessel) (Time of arrival) Sheerness." (If the answers to all the questions on page 1 are "NO" and the vessel has not called at any of the ports mentioned above the Master need not communicate with the Port Sanitary Authority unless directed to do so by a Customs Officer.) The maximum penalty for breach of the Port Sanitary Eegulations, 1933, is £100. CHAS. F. WHITE, Medical Officer of Health, Port of London. *Name of ship as one word. Time on 24-hour clock. Every vessel from "foreign" is hailed by His Majesty's Customs off Gravesend. When a ship is boarded by one of your Medical Officers he collects the Declaration of Health. The Customs Officers take the forms from the ships which are not medically inspected and the Boarding Medical Officer collects them each evening when he makes up his list of arrivals from the Preventive Officer's log. The day's batch of forms are then posted to the Port Sanitary Office together with the Medical Officer's other records and reports. 19 At Sheerness the Declarations of Health are collected by the Medical Officer or the Customs and forwarded by the former with his weekly report. Boarding of Vessels on arrival. The Port Sanitary Authority maintain at Gravesend a hulk, the "Hygeia," on which the Boarding Medical Officers live during their tour of duty. The boarding launch "Howard Deighton," which has an ambulance room on deck, lies alongside the "Hygeia." There are three Boarding Medical Officers and three crews for the launch, each having 24 hours afloat and 48 hours ashore. Ships are boarded at any time of the day or night as soon as they arrive off Gravesend. The Customs also maintain a launch constantly on duty in this reach of the river, and it is here also that the sea pilot hands over to the river pilot. Thus all three services are in close touch with one another. The only criticism is that all these activities take place at the extreme eastern limit of the Boarding Station, which may lead to some congestion when there is a rush of shipping after fog. Consideration has been given to a scheme whereby the Boarding Medical Officer would live in the Hospital during his tour of duty. This would be an advantage in that there would always be a Medical Officer at the Hospital; the cost of maintenance of the "Hygeia" would be saved; visual signals from approaching ships would be more quickly and easily observed and there would be less congestion at busy times. On the other hand, it would be very expensive to construct at the Hospital a jetty at which the boarding launch could lie at any state of the tide and in any weather, for it would be necessary to run out some 420 feet from the shore, and the situation would be much more exposed than that of the "Hygeia," close contact with the Customs would be more difficult to maintain and the Port Sanitary Authority's Staff would be about a mile from Gravesend and so out of touch with valuable sources of information in regard to the movements of ships. When the boarding launch is undergoing overhaul the Medical Officers board from the Customs launch and the up-river launch is sent down to Gravesend to enable the Sanitary Inspector on the lower river district to carry out his duties and to remove any cases of infectious sickness to the Port Sanitary Hospital. This means that the Sanitary Inspector in the middle and upper river district has to do his work as best he can without a launch. Up to the year 1915 the Port Sanitary Authority had three working launches on the river. At the present time there are only two, though the work to be done has increased, and it is desirable that the river district should be again divided into three sections, each under the supervision of a Sanitary Inspector with a launch at his disposal. The lower district from Purfleet to Thameshaven could be worked by the boarding launch "Howard Deighton." The middle district from Purfleet to Greenwich could be worked by the "James Howell," but when this launch becomes unserviceable she should be replaced by a launch smaller than the " Howard Deighton " but capable of being used as a boarding launch for the Medical Officers when the "Howard Deighton" is out of commission. At the present time when the boarding launch is laid up the Medical Officers must board from the Customs launch. The Customs are most generous and courteous in giving every possible facility, but they are required to hail and grant pratique to every incoming vessel from " foreign," consequently they frequently cannot stand by while the Boarding Medical Officer inspects a number of passengers and a large crew or carefully examines cases of sickness which may be of an infectious nature. It is not suggested that the Port Sanitary Authority should attempt to be independent of the assistance of the Customs Officers in this section of their work. such is neither desirable nor practicable, but it is desirable that the Medical Officer should always have his own launch so that he can have time to do his work thoroughly, without feeling that he is delaying the Customs Officers and making it difficult for them to carrv out their own duties. The boarding launch is not for the use of the Medical Officers only. During the day she must, whenever possible, be handed over to the Sanitary Inspector so that he can inspect ships lying in the lower river district. If ships which have to be boarded arrive unexpectedly while the launch is away with the Sanitary Inspector, the Medical' Officer is taken off by the Customs. For the upper river district, from Greenwich to Teddington, a small launch is required to convey the Sanitary Inspector to ships lying at wharves and to enable 20 him to carry out other important duties in this section. Such a launch would need to be sturdily built because of the nature of the work, but she would never be required to take over boarding duties at Gravesend, and therefore need not be more than about 30 feet long, nor have a speed of more than about 9 or 10 knots. The list of scheduled ports on page 4 of the Declaration of Health covers, broadly speaking, the whole of Asia, Africa, South and Central America and the Eastern Mediterranean. To attempt to supply to Pilots and Customs Officers a weekly list of infected ports based on the Record of Infectious Diseases in Ports, &c., at Home and Abroad, issued weekly by the Ministry of Health, would lead to chaos and to much more delay and inconvenience to shipping than the system of inspecting, as a routine, ships from any part of the world in which dangerous infectious diseases are endemic or, from time to time, epidemic. I still hope that some day the routine boarding of ships from infected ports will be discontinued and that we shall be able to substitute the boarding not only of ships on which infectious or doubtful sickness or deaths have occurred during the voyage, but also of all those which have on board at the time of arrival any cases of sickness of any sort whatever, however trivial such cases may appear to be. It might be possible to extend some concessions to ships carrying surgeons who fully comprehend the requirements of Port Sanitary Authorities and who could be relied upon to notify any case of sickness which might conceivably be of an infectious nature. But I am of the opinion that the Master of a ship should not be required to carry the responsibility of diagnosis in any case of illness once his ship is within a Port Sanitary district. When the Port Medical Officer sees a case of sickness his first thought is “May this be a case of infectious disease?" and only when he is confident that it is non-infectious is he prepared to allow the patient to proceed. Neither the Master nor the Surgeon approach the question of diagnosis from this angle, and therefore they will, from time to time, miss infectious cases which the Port Medical Officer would at least remove to hospital for observation. Many cases of Typhoid Fever, some of Small-pox and a few of Plague have been landed in this country as Influenza, a diagnosis which should always be regarded with suspicion by every Port Medical Officer. Notifications to the Authority of inward Vessels requiring special attention. By arrangement with the General Post Office, wireless messages sent in accordance with the instructions on the Declaration of Health are received by the North Foreland Radio Station and telephoned direct to the Medical Officer on duty on the " Hygeia." Ships have not, up to the present time, been required to send the standard Quarantine Message prescribed in the Second Schedule to the Regulations. There is always a Medical Officer on duty, a launch available and a hospital ready for the reception of cases, so that all that is absolutely necessary in the Port of London is advance notification of the name of the ship and the time she is expected to arrive on the boarding station. A number of ships voluntarily send the full Quarantine Message in code, which is deciphered by the Medical Officer from Volume II. (Radio) of the International Code of Signals and the Liste Alphabetique des Indicatifs D'Appel des Stations Fixes, Terrestres et Mobiles. The practice of sending messages through Agents has been discouraged, because they were frequently not forwarded promptly during the night or at week-ends. Practically all messages are now received direct from ships, but when some serious infectious sickness has occurred on board, Shipping Companies and Agents usually communicate the news as soon as they receive it, and ask if there are any special instructions which they can wireless to the ship concerned. Since the Regulations came into force on 1st May, 1933, one thousand six hundred and twenty vessels requiring inspection have arrived. Of these, 75 failed to send wireless messages. In 12 cases the pilot omitted to supply the Master with a Declaration of Health form; in 50 cases the Master failed to carry out the instructions, and in 13 cases the ships were not fitted with wireless transmitting apparatus. The number of instances of failure to comply with the Regulations is, however, diminishing month by month. 21 Ships requiring medical inspection are required to fly the L.I.M. signal during the day and to flash "Q" on their Morse lamp by night when approaching Gravesend. No use has been made of land signal stations. It would be convenient to receive messages from Lloyd's Signal Station at Southend, as they would enable the Medical Officer to time the arrival of ships more accurately than do the wireless messages. Such an arrangement, would, however, involve expenditure which I have not felt justified in asking the Port Sanitary Authority to incur. Information that ships are expected on certain tides is obtained from Shipping Companies and their Agents, the Harbour Master, Lloyd's Agent, Customs Officers, Pilots and the Masters of Tugs. All this news is welcome and useful, but cannot be regarded as an efficient substitute for the wireless messages from the actual ships which require our attention. Mooring Stations designated under Article 10. Application was made to the Port of London Authority for Mooring Stations, and the following have been designated:— (a) Within the Docks:— London and St. Katharine Docks These are small and busy docks and it is impossible to allocate a mooring station. Vessels which had to be isolated would have to be sent out of the docks into the River to the nearest available River mooring, by arrangement with the Harbour Master. Surrey Commercial Dock Quebec Dock Buoys. West India and Millwall Docks Mark Lane Buoys, Millwall Dock. East India Dock Here again it would not be possible to isolate a vessel, and it would be necessary to send vessels to moorings in the River. Royal Victoria, Royal Albert and (a) Between "A" Jetty and No. 9 Granary, Royal Victoria King George V. Docks. Dock; (b) "C" Jetty Buoys, Royal Victoria Docks. Tilbury Dock The most suitable quay berth available. In the event of any of these moorings being occupied when required for an infected ship, the Port Sanitary Authority has been assured of the co-operation of the Port of London Authority's officials in finding a suitable berth. (b) Outside the Docks:— Thames Gravesend Lower Mooring or, if this is occupied, to the vessel's own anchors in this vicinity. MedwayTo anchor off Garrison Point. Particulars of any standing Exemptions from the provisions of Article 14. All ships which are required to be visited on arrival by the Port Medical Officer are dealt with in the Boarding Station at Gravesend. Any found to be "infected" or ''suspected'' can be sent to the mooring station by the Boarding Medical Officer himself. If there are on board cases of the minor infectious diseases, it would be no advantage to anyone to let ships proceed to their berths before being medically inspected because they can be cleared promptly at Gravesend, whereas it might take , several hours to get a Medical Officer to them in the docks, at wharves or at moorings in the River. No standing exemptions have therefore been made in regard to ships proceeding above Gravesend. But at Thameshaven and at the mouth of the Medway the following special arrangements have been proposed to His Majesty's Customs:— Thameshaven.—In view of the fact that "oil tankers" are very unlikely to be infected with Rat Plague and that the crew are seldom exposed to infection ashore, it would be unreasonable to require such vessels to come up to Gravesend for medical inspection even if they have come from infected ports. It has, therefore, been arranged with His Majesty's Customs that in respect of oil tankers proceeding to Thameshaven, if the answers to all the questions on page 1 of the Declaration of Health are "No," pratique may be granted without reference to the Medical Officer, but if any of the answers are "Yes," the Customs Officer who boards her shall communicate by telephone with the Medical Officer on duty on the " Hygeia." The mooring stations of such vessels may, however, be their ordinary berths at Thameshaven. 22 Sheerness.—(1) Oil Tankers.—These may be dealt with in just the same way as "oil tankers" at Thameshaven, except that in case of necessity communications should be sent to the Port Sanitary Authority's Boarding Medical Officer at Sheerness instead of to the "Hygeia." (2) All other ships from "foreign," whether remaining in the Port of London or bound for Rochester.— If the vessel has called at an infected port, the Port Sanitary Authority's Boarding Medical Officer at Sheerness should be informed and the vessel should be detained in the Customs Boarding Station pending his arrival, even if the answers to all the questions on page 1 of the Declaration of Health are "No." If the vessel has not called at an infected port but the answer to any of the questions on page 1 of the Declaration of Health is "Yes," the Boarding Officer at Sheerness should be informed and the vessel should be detained in the Customs Boarding Station until visited by him, except that if only questions 4 and 6 are answered in the affirmative the vessel may proceed to her berth to be dealt with there by the Medical Officer concerned, i.e., either the Port of London Sanitary Authority's Boarding Medical Officer at Sheerness or the Medical Officer of Health of Rochester, who should be informed accordingly. Experience or<' working Article 16. (1) As ships are cleared in the River immediately on arrival, no difficulty has been experienced in preventing the embarkation or disembarkation of unauthorised persons. (2) When a Ship arrives which has on board a case of one of the major infectious diseases or on which such a case has died or has been landed abroad within the incubation period of the particular disease, it is the practice to regard every person on board as a contact and accordingly to arrange for his observation or surveillance. Observation is only applied to members of the crew who are standing by the ship in port. Those who are intending to leave the ship must give their names and addresses before leaving. Experience has shown that it is useless to take the address from the passenger manifest and the crew's articles. Passengers frequently give a business address or a destination to which they will not be proceeding for several days. A member of the crew will frequently give the address of his next of kin or of some person who is to be informed if he becomes a casualty. Everyone on board must, therefore, be seen individually and asked the address to which he is proceeding immediately on disembarkation. This interrogation is conveniently made at the time of medical inspection, and when there are a large number of passengers one or two clerks accompany the Medical Officers to the ship and assist in this work. The introduction of a double post card, one half of which is for the notification of the immediate address and the other half for the notification of any change of address, has proved very successful in expediting the clearing of ships and the transmission of the necessary information to the Medical Officers of Health of the districts of destination and in making passengers realise their obligations under the Regulations. The two halves of the post card are as under:— PORT SANITARY REGULATIONS, 1933. Penalty for Breach of Regulations, £100. In accordance with the above Regulations you are permitted to disembark on the following conditions:— 1. That you give to the Medical Officer of Health of the Port of London the precise address to which you are proceeding immediately on landing. 2. That if you change your address at any time within 14 days of disembarkation you shall notify forthwith your new address to the Medical Officer of Health of the Port of London on the attached card. Name and Full Address in Block Letters. I and members of my family are proceeding to the following address forthwith:— No. or Name of House Street Postal District County Signature 28 PORT OF LONDON SANITARY AUTHORITY, Port Sanitary Regulations, 1933. Penalty for Breach of Regulations, £100. Notification of Change of Address within 14 Days of Disembarkation. Having disembarked from the s.s. on (date) my address from (date) to (date) will be as under. Name and Full Address in Block Letters. Name No. or Name of House Street Postal District County Signature This Card may be sent through the post unstamped, but if it is enclosed in an Envelope Postage must be Prepaid. Each half is addressed to the Medical Officer of Health of the Port of London. The section on which the immediate address is written is collected by the Medical Officer when he inspects the passenger. The section for notification of change of address is on the "Business Reply Card" system so that the passenger need not stamp it. The importance of forwarding to Medical Officers of Health without delay the names and addresses of contacts proceeding to other districts is fully appreciated, and the clerical Staff work continuously until this task has been completed. Probably few Medical Officers of Health realise the labour involved when there are seven or eight hundred passengers and crew proceeding to destinations scattered all over the British Isles. There is no difficulty in the case of contacts going to the towns, but in the case of those going to rural areas it is necessary to find out first the sanitary district in which the place is situated and then to ascertain the address of the Medical Officer of Health. I have been asked to indicate on the notifications the vaccinal state of the contacts, but in the first place this would frequently delay the posting of the notifications and in the second place the information would not relieve the Medical Officer of Health of the responsibility of exercising surveillance, and so would not save him any trouble. The efficiency of the ''Business Reply Card'' system for the notification of change of address may be illustrated by the experience in regard to the case of the ss. "Rajputana," on which a case of Small-pox had occurred and which arrived in the Port of London on the 26th May:— Passengers. Crew. Number of cards issued 160 129 = 289 „ of persons concerned 364 129 = 493 „ of cards returned notifying change of address 57 6 = 63 „ of persons concerned 98 6 = 104 „ of Medical Officers of Health notified 179 Two addresses only could not be traced by the local Medical Officer of Health. One of these was corrected next day, but the other could not be traced. What, if any, arrangements have been made for:— (a) Premises and waiting rooms for medical examination. Medical examinations are usually carried out on board ship, but there are rooms for the medical inspection of aliens on Tilbury Landing Stage and West Street Pier, Gravesend. (b) Cleansing and disinfection of ships, persons and clothing and other articles. When cases of infectious disease are removed from ships on arrival during the day time the Sanitary Inspector on the lower district puts the infected quarters under fumigation with Sulphur Dioxide or Formalin, if he has time. If a case is removed 24 at night when the Sanitary Inspector is not on duty or if the ship is proceeding to dock immediately, the infected quarters are sealed and disinfected after the ship has berthed. Disinfections of large spaces are usually carried out by private firms under the supervision of a Sanitary Inspector. A supply of sulphur candles, formalin lamps, disinfectant solutions and a spray are available for every Sanitary Inspector. At the Port Sanitary Hospital there is a disinfecting station with spray and slipper baths and a Washington Lyons Steam Disinfector. Close contacts with infectious, disease, clothing, bedding, &c., are taken by the boarding launch to this station, disinfected and then returned to the ship. (c) Premises for the temporary accommodation of persons for whom such modation is required for the purposes of the Regulations. Passengers or crew to be kept under observation are sent to the Port Sanitary Hospital. So far it has not been necessary to make special provision on a large scale, and if the necessity did arise the ship would be detained until temporary accommodation ashore had been found. (d) Hospital accommodation available for Plague, Cholera, Yellow Fever, Small-pox and other infectious diseases. The Port Sanitary Authority maintain a hospital for infectious diseases on the south bank of the River about a mile below Gravesend. Patients can be landed from the boarding launch at a jetty and be wheeled straight into the hospital. At dead low water the launch cannot get to the jetty, but during the flood tide and for about two hours of the ebb, patients can be landed. It is proposed to raise half the width of the jetty by about 7 feet at its lower end so that it will be available during the greater part of the ebb tide. This addition has been rendered necessary because passenger ships now go alongside Tilbury Landing Stage at any state of the tide, and therefore infectious cases have sometimes to be removed on the ebb. It would be very expensive to make provision for the landing of patients at dead low water, because it would be necessary to extend the jetty to more than twice its present length. The hospital buildings comprise a small administrative block and nurses' home, three ward blocks, a laundry, a disinfecting station, a porter's cottage and a mortuary. Thirty beds are maintained in readiness. This is ample for all ordinary requirements, but in case of necessity at least 50 patients could be accommodated. Usually there are a few cases only, but often of several different diseases, and therefore a cubicle ward is highly desirable. There is no need to increase the total accommodation, but it has been recommended that the smallest and oldest ward block should be demolished and that a cubicle ward with eight cubicles should be erected in its place. Such a ward would ordinarily accommodate all the patients, leaving one ward block for use in the event of a small epidemic occurring on board a ship and the other and most isolated ward block for the accommodation of any cases of Small-pox. No charge is made for the maintenance and treatment in this hospital of either passengers or members of the crews from merchant ships of any nationality. A small charge is made for patients from the Training Ships and the Sea School. Formerly the hospital was supplied with water from a deep well in the grounds. For 50 years this well had been perfectly satisfactory, but owing to the increased pumping from other wells in the neighbourhood the water gradually became brackish, and the supply from the Gravesend and Milton Water Works Company has now been piped in. As the hospital site is below Thames high-water mark, drainage presents a difficulty. All excreta are received into pails, mixed with sawdust and burnt in an incinerator. Only domestic waste water is discharged into the river. In view of the fact that a number of cases of Typhoid Fever are treated in the hospital annually. this arrangement has obvious advantages. 25 The staffing of a small isolation hospital in which the amount and nature of the work varies considerably, and the patients are of all types and races and frequently unable to speak English, is difficult. In the majority of English ports it is the practice to allow ships in which there are cases of the minor infectious diseases to proceed to their berths with the cases on board and then to remove the patients to the isolation hospitals in the adjacent town. This is practicable in compact ports. But the Port of London Sanitary Authority must maintain their own isolation hospital in close proximity to the boarding station and must be prepared to receive there all the cases of infectious disease arriving in ships, because once a ship passes Gravesend she may proceed to a berth in any of the five dock groups with their 45 miles of quays or at any of the wharves along the 25 miles of the Thames between Tilbury and London Bridge or at one of the mooring buoys in the River. It is obvious that if infectious cases were left on board until the ship berthed, to be removed to the nearest isolation hospital, there would inevitably be serious delay and inconvenience both to patients and ships. There is another essential reason for the Port Sanitary Authority having their own hospital. The Boarding Medical Officers frequently have to make diagnoses under very difficult conditions; the patient may be lying in an upper berth in a badly lighted forecastle; only a vague history of his illness may be available and he may be unable to describe his symptoms in English. Under such circumstances it is very desirable that the Medical Officer should be able to remove the patient to a hospital where he can be kept under observation. Finally, the Port Sanitary Authority must provide accommodation for infectious diseases such as Measles, Chicken-pox and Mumps, which are not usually nursed in hospitals, because passenger patients cannot be allowed to travel home in public conveyances and crew patients can neither be efficiently isolated nor nursed when their ship is in dock. (e) Ambulance transport. The boarding launch "Howard Deighton" has an ambulance room on deck with accommodation for four stretcher cases or eight walking cases. This room can be warmed by an electric radiator and patients can be transferred from ships to hospital in comfort and safety. The up-river launch "James Howell" has a small cabin forward in which a patient can be carried, but it is seldom used for this purpose. If a case of sickness arises on a ship in the Tilbury or the Royal Docks, the "Howard Deighton" is usually sent to remove it. If a case arises on a ship in the other docks nearer London or at a wharf, the "James Howell" may pick it up and transfer it to the "Howard Deighton" which is sent up to meet her, but more commonly arrangements are made with the London County Council to take the case by road ambulance to the Port Sanitary Hospital. This involves the patient in less risk of exposure to chill, is quicker and usually cheaper. (f) Supervision of contacts. The method of dealing with contacts who are leaving a ship has been described on page 22. Contacts remaining on board are kept under daily supervision by the Deputy Medical Officer of Health, unless the Shipping Company have a Medical Officer ashore who is able and willing to undertake the daily inspection and to notify immediately any cases of illness. Arrangements for the Bacteriological or Pathological Examination of Rats for Plague. The bacteriological examination of rats for Plague is carried out in the laboratories of the Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich, where there is a Staff of skilled Bacteriologists 26 under the direction of Professor Hewlett. Assistant Eat Officers collect rats from ships and shore premises in their district each day. They tie to one leg of each rat a small label, on which is a letter combination indicating the Dock where the rat was obtained (thus R.A.D. indicates Royal Albert Dock, S.C.D. Surrey Commercial Dock, &c.) and a number. In their daily report sheets the Assistant Rat Officers enter each letter-number combination, with notes opposite showing exactly where and how each rat was obtained. They then place the rats in a linen bag, which they put in a tin box. At the end of the day they deliver the tin boxes at the laboratory of the Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich, and receive in exchange empty bags and boxes for the next day's rats. Rats are delivered about 5 p.m., and examined next morning. If any rats were found Plague-infected, the letters and number on the label attached would be telephoned to your Medical Officer, who, on reference to the Assistant Rat Officer's reports, could at once ascertain exactly where such rats were obtained and institute Plague preventive measures there. If rats are found dead under circumstances suggesting that they have died of Plague, they are taken at once to the laboratory, and an immediate examination and report is requested. The rats from Tilbury Dock are sent by train from Gravesend to Greenwich, where they are collected each morning by one of the Staff and taken to the laboratory. It is not found possible to dip the rats on the Docks in a flea-killing solution, but it has been arranged that the bags containing the rats should be dipped in kerosine at the laboratory. The bags returned empty to the Assistant Rat Officers are therefore saturated in kerosine, which is sufficient to destroy the fleas on the subsequent batches of rats placed in the bags. Arrangements made for other Bacteriological and Pathological Examinations. All bacteriological and pathological examinations are carried out at the laboratories of the Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. Arrangements for the diagnosis and treatment of Venereal Diseases among Sailors, under International arrangements. The Venereal Diseases are not compulsorily notifiable, but efforts are made to bring to the notice of all seamen in the Port the facilities for free treatment under the Brussels Agreement. When the Medical Officers board ships on arrival they always enquire whether there are any cases of Venereal Disease on board, and if any are reported they endeavour to see the infected men to point out to them the importance of obtaining skilled treatment as soon as possible and to acquaint them with the situation of the clinic nearest the ship's berth and the times at which cases may attend. The Port Sanitary Authority have printed the following notice in English, French, German, Dutch, Danish, Norwegian, Swedish, Finnish, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Greek, Latvian, Estonian, Russian, Japanese, Chinese, Hindustani, Bengali, Marathi and Gujarati. The translations were kindly undertaken by the Consuls of the various countries, and the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company generously printed, in Bombay, the notices for Indian seamen. VENEREAL DISEASES. Syphilis (Pox) and Gonorrhoea (Clap) can be cured by skilful treatment in the early stages. If treatment is neglected or unskilful these diseases become difficult to cure and there is grave risk of years of ill-health and premature death to the sufferer and of the spread of infection to others. 27 Skilled treatment free of charge and under conditions of secrecy can be obtained at the following clinics at the times stated:— London. Seamen's Hospital, King William Street, Greenwich, S.E. 10. Syphilis—Monday and Wednesday 7 p.m. Gonorrhœa—Tuesday, 6 p.m.; Friday, 7 p.m. (Merchant Seamen may attend at any other time.) Miller General Hospital, Greenwich Road, Greenwich, S.E. 10. Daily, 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Seamen's Hospital, Royal Albert Dock, E. 16. Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, Friday, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.; Wednesday 9 a.m. to 2 p.m.; Saturday, 9 a.m. to 12.30 p.m. (Merchant Seamen may attend at any other time.) London Hospital (Whitechapel Clinic), Turner Street, Mile End, E. 1. Daily, 8 a.m. to 9 p.m.; Sunday, 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. and 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. Guy's Hospital, St. Thomas Street, Borough, S.E. 1. Daily, 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. St. Thomas's Hospital, Westminster Bridge, S.E. 1. Daily, 8 a.m to 10 p.m.; Sunday, 10 a.m. to 12 noon. St. Paul's Hospital, Endell Street, Covent Garden, W.C. 2. Daily, 8 a.m. to 10 p.m.; Sunday, 10 a.m. to noon and 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. St. Bartholomew's Hospital, 20, Golden Lane, E.C. 1. Monday, 5 p.m. to 7 p.m.; Thursday, 12 noon to 2 p.m. Gravesend. 22, Cobham Street, Gravesend. Tuesday, 11 a.m. to 12.45 p.m.; Thursday, 4.45 p.m. to 6.30 p.m. The Sanitary Inspectors carry with them copies of this notice and leave one, in the appropriate language, on every ship they visit. By courtesy of the Port of London Authority this notice is also posted in all the latrines on the dock estate. It is the duty of the Sanitary Inspectors to see that the notices are in the languages of the seamen on board ships in the vicinity, and also that they are renewed when necessary. Though they are not protected in any way, the notices have suffered much less defacement than was anticipated. In 1932 it was suggested to the British Council for the Welfare of the Mercantile Marine that Notice Boards should be erected at the exits from the docks, on which should be displayed information regarding the situation of local hospitals, clinics, sailors' homes, boarding houses, facilities for recreation, &c. It was felt that if seamen had ready access to this information, those who needed medical treatment would be more likely to seek attention promptly instead of postponing it until they reached their home port, and those who sought amusement would have a definite goal to make for on leaving the docks instead of wandering aimlessly about the streets, an easy prey to the varied temptations of the neighbourhood. The British Council accepted the suggestions, but unfortunately funds were not available to provide glass-covered notice boards large enough to display all the information originally proposed. However, maps of the dock area were secured and the situation of hospitals, clinics, sailors' homes, churches and recreation rooms were clearly marked thereon. The Corporation of the City, as the Port Sanitary Authority, made a grant of £25 from City's Cash to defray the cost of framing 41 of these maps which have, by permission of the Port of London Authority, been fixed at 39 dock exits. Arrangements for the interment of dead. When cases of infectious sickness die in the Port Sanitary Hospital, arrangements for interment are made with an undertaker in Gravesend. 28 Table C. Cases of Infectious Sickness landed from Vessels. Disease. Number of Cases during the Year. Number of vessels concerned. Average Number of Cases for previous 5 years Passengers. Crew. Small-pox — — — 1.4 Scarlet Fever 2 2 4 10.4 Diphtheria 4 3 5 8.0 Enteric Fever 1 13 10 18.8 Measles 3 1 4 10.0 German Measles — 1 1 12.8 Erysipelas — 1 1 0.8 Continued Fever — — — 0.2 Pulmonary Tuberculosis 74 27 59 81.2 Tuberculosis (other kinds) 1 — 1 3.4 Pneumonia 1 5 6 16.6 Influenza 2 9 8 5.0 Cerebro-spinal Meningitis — — — 0.8 Dysentery — 2 2 9.8 Encephalitis Lethargica — — — — Malaria 1 6 7 19.4 Chicken-pox 1 8 7 13.2 Remittent and Relapsing Fever — — — 0.2 Mumps 6 4 5 3.0 Note.—The following cases of infectious disease occurred on board Training Ships moored in the Thames:— Scarlet Fever 16. The following case of infectious disease occurred amongst persons resident in the dock area:— Scarlet Fever 1. Table D. Cases of Infectious Sickness occurring on Vessels during the Voyage, but disposed of prior to arrival. Disease. Number of Cases during the Year. Number of vessels concerned. Average Number of Cases for previous 5 years Passengers. Crew. Cholera — 1 1 2.4 Plague — — — 0.6 Small-pox — 4 4 12.2 Scarlet Fever — — — 2.6 Diphtheria — — — 2.2 Enteric Fever 9 6 14 19.0 Measles 20 2 13 25.6 German Measles 2 1 3 6.2 Erysipelas — — — 1.8 Continued Fever — — — 0.4 Pulmonary Tuberculosis 37 10 31 41.0 Tuberculosis (other kinds) — — — 1.0 Pneumonia 3 4 7 29.2 Influenza 27 22 14 190.4 Cerebro-spinal Meningitis — 1 1 0.8 Dysentery — 1 1 12.6 Encephalitis Lethargica — — — 0.4 Malaria 2 34 18 80.4 Chicken-pox 9 4 10 36.0 Remittent and Relapsing Fever — — — - Mumps 7 4 7 13.5 Cholera. ss. "Dumana."—This vessel arrived at Gravesend on 25th June having had a case of Cholera on board during the voyage. A native saloon boy was taken ill on 18th May and isolated in the ship's hospital, where he died on 19th May. His body was buried at sea and all his bedding destroyed. On arrival of the vessel at Madras on 21st May all native quarters were fumigated by the Port Medical Officer and the whole of the crew were inoculated with anti-Cholera serum. No other case occurred on the vessel. Small-pox. ss. "Strathaird."—Previous Information.—A telephone message was received on the 30th January from the Medical Superintendent of the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company that one passenger suffering from Small-pox and one 29 contact had been landed at Suez on the 28th January; the vessel was bound for London, calling at Plymouth on 9th February. The Medical Officer of Health of Plymouth was immediately notified. On 1st February a letter was received from the Ministry of Health confirming the above information. Movements of Vessel:— Brisbane Dec. 21 Port Sudan Jan. 27 Sydney „ 30 Suez „ 29 Melbourne Jan. 3 Port Said „ 29 Adelaide „ 5 Marseilles Feb. 4 Fremantle „ 9 Gibraltar „ 6 Colombo „ 18 Plymouth „ 9 Bombay „ 21 Gravesend „ 10 Aden „ 25 Number of Persons on Board.—Passengers, 371. Crew: Europeans, 221; Natives, 243. In addition, 161 passengers left the vessel at Marseilles and 45 passengers at Plymouth. History of the Case.—The patient, J. H., an American passenger, came on board at Bombay on 21st January with a fellow traveller, who occupied the same cabin. At Aden this fellow traveller informed the Ship's Surgeon that J. H. had been so ill for three days before embarking that he was only just well enough to come on board at Bombay, and that he now had some spots on him. The Ship's Surgeon saw the patient and found a pustular rash all over the body, particularly marked on forehead, face and backs of wrists. There were three spots in the palms of his hands and two on the soles of his feet. J. H. was a Christian Scientist, and therefore had not asked for medical advice. Action taken on Board.—The Surgeon diagnosed Variola, and at once isolated both the patient and the contact in the ship's hospital on the poop deck. The contact was at once vaccinated, but as he was landed with the patient at Suez the result could not be ascertained. The whole of the European crew (221) were vaccinated except those members who could show evidence of successful vaccination within the last two years. The native crew (243) were all protected by vaccination within the last year. The passengers were all offered vaccination. Of those who landed at London, 219 availed themselves of the offer and 152 declined to be vaccinated. The majority of the latter had been vaccinated within the last five years. Action taken in London.—The vessel arrived off Gravesend at 4.30 a.m. on Friday, the 10th February, and was boarded by Dr. H. Willoughby. The entire crew (European and Native) was examined at 6 a.m., and the home addresses of the Europeans checked. No member of the crew was found to be sick. At 8.30 a.m., Dr. Willoughby, accompanied by Dr. Warrack and two of the clerical Staff, again boarded the vessel off Tilbury landing stage, when the whole of the passengers were examined and their addresses carefully checked with the passenger lists. The names and addresses of the passengers were forwarded to the Medical Officers of Health of the district concerned by 7.50 p.m. the same day, and those of the European crew were posted on the morning of 11th February. The entire alleyway in which the patient's cabin was situated had been disinfected immediately after the removal of the case to the ship's hospital and the hospital had been disinfected immediately after the landing of the case at Suez. The patient's personal effects had been landed with him. The hospital bedding had been exposed to Sulphur Dioxide. On arrival at Gravesend, this bedding, &c., was taken to Denton Hospital for steam disinfection, and after the vessel docked the infected cabins and the isolation hospital were again disinfected. The native crew and those members of the European crew who remained on board were kept under daily observation. 80 There was on board a lady passenger, who had also embarked at Bombay with her husband and child. On 30th January she had reported to the Ship's Surgeon with an eruption on the trunk, face and arms. She had suffered from malaise for one day only, the distribution of the rash was centripetal and the papules, which rapidly developed into vesicles, appeared in crops over a period of a week. The patient had been successfully vaccinated in infancy. Re-vaccinations, two and a-half years ago and one year ago, had not been successful. The Surgeon diagnosed Chicken-pox. This diagnosis was confirmed by the Port Medical Officer in Plymouth, and again in London. The patient was permitted to proceed to her own home in a private car. The infection could not have been contracted on the ship, as she only embarked nine days before the eruption appeared. ss. "Rawalpindi."—Previous Information.—A telegram was received on 9th March from the Medical Officer of Health of Plymouth to the effect that the ss. "Rawalpindi" had on arrival reported the landing at Aden on 22nd February of a deck passenger suffering from Small-pox. Movements of Vessel— Bombay February 18 Gibraltar March 6 Aden „ 22 Plymouth „ 9 Port Said „ 26 Gravesend „ 10 Marseilles March 3 Number of Persons on Board.—Passengers, 447. Crew: Europeans, 122; Natives, 221. In addition, 119 passengers left the vessel at Marseilles and 84 passengers at Plymouth. History of Case.—A native deck passenger was found on disembarkation at Aden on 22nd February to have a few spots on his face and body. The case was diagnosed by the Aden Port Sanitary Authority as Chicken-pox and the patient was removed to hospital with his effects. In all there were nine native deck passengers who embarked at Bombay for Aden. They were berthed on the after deck and had no immediate contact with the other persons on board. The effects of the deck passengers were landed with them. No ship's bedding, &c., had been used by these passengers. On the arrival of the vessel off Suez on 26th February, the Port Health Officer informed the Ship's Surgeon that the case landed at Aden had been diagnosed as Small-pox. Action taken on Board.—All effects had been landed with the patient at Aden, and the only action taken on board was the washing with caustic soda and sea water of the deck occupied by the native passengers. All the crew, native and European, had been vaccinated within the last year. Every passenger who embarked at Bombay was examined by the Port Medical Officer and all were reported to be well protected by vaccination against Small-pox. Four passengers were vaccinated by the Ship's Surgeon, en route, at their own request. Action taken in London.—The vessel arrived off Gravesend at 8 a.m. on Friday, 10th March, and was boarded by Dr. Warrack and Dr. Kidd, accompanied by two of the clerical staff. The whole of the passengers and crew were medically inspected and the names and addresses of the passengers were carefully checked with the passenger list. These names and addresses were subsequently forwarded to the Medical Officers of Health of the districts concerned by 5 p.m. the same day. No information had been sent to the Ministry of Health regarding the destinations of the passengers who had landed at Marseilles. The names and addresses of these passengers were obtained from the manifest and were forwarded immediately to the Medical Officers of Health concerned. These addresses could not, of course, be checked. Only four of the crew left the ship. Those remaining on board were kept under daily observation. The vessel sailed again on the 17th March. ss. "Rajputana."—Previous Information.—On 15th May the Medical Superintendent of the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company telephoned that a passenger from the ss. "Rajputana" had died from Small-pox in hospital at Aden on 5th May, and that the vessel was due at Plymouth on 25th May and London 31 26th May. This information was communicated to the Port Medical Officer of Health of Plymouth. A thousand post cards for the notification of names and addresses of passengers and crew landing in London were sent to the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company, who agreed to put them on board at Plymouth so that they would be filled up by the time the vessel arrived in London. Movements of Vessel— Bombay May 6 Gibraltar May 22 Aden „ 10 Plymouth „ 25 Port Said „ 14 London „ 26 Marseilles „ 19 Number of Persons on Board.—Passengers, 364. Crew: Europeans, 129; Natives, 214. History of Case.—Mr. W., a second saloon passenger, embarked at Bombay on 6th May. He was not feeling well at that time, and reported to the Ship's Surgeon that he had a "chill on the liver." On 8th May he developed a hæmorrhagic rash on his trunk, arms and legs. He had never been vaccinated, and the Ship's Surgeon, suspecting Small-pox, promptly isolated him in the ship's isolation hospital. The Surgeon vaccinated the patient and his two cabin companions. On 10th May the ship arrived at Aden. In addition to the hemorrhagic rash, the patient then had some vesicles on the trunk, arms and legs. His face was clear. The Port Medical Officer at Aden did not consider the case to be Small-pox, but the Ship's Surgeon took on board sufficient vaccine to vaccinate all on board. On 12th May the ship received a wireless message from Aden that the case was Small-pox, and later another message that he had died. The Surgeon then vaccinated all the crew and as many passengers as would submit (257). Passengers who subsequently joined the ship at Marseilles were also offered vaccination. The cabin, hospital, bedding, &c., were fumigated with formalin. At Port Said the bell-boy was landed as a suspected case of Small-pox, but later a wireless message was received that the case was one of Impetigo. Action on arrival in London.—The vessel arrived off Gravesend at 7.15 a.m., and was boarded by Dr. Warrack, Dr. H. Willoughby, a Sanitary Inspector and two clerks. Every passenger and member of the crew was medically examined, but none showed any signs or symptoms suggesting Small-pox. The names and addresses were all checked and each person retained the post card on which to notify any change of address within 14 days of disembarkation. The bedding, &c., from the infected cabin and hospital were removed to the Port Sanitary Hospital for disinfection by steam, and these two compartments were placed under fumigation with S02. The ship was released from detention at 9.45 a.m., and the names and addresses of contacts were all forwarded by post to the Medical Officers of Health concerned by 4.30 p.m. This was the first occasion on which the "Business Reply Card" system, sanctioned by your Worshipful Committee, was used. ss. "Clan Macquarrie."—Previous Information.—A telegram was received on the hulk "Hygeia" on 5th September from the Directeur Quarantine, Suez, to the effect that a case of Small-pox had been disembarked there on the 4th September. Movements of Vessel— Calcutta July 26 Colombo Aug. 17 Chittagong Aug. 5 Suez „ 30 Bimlipatam 8 Port Said „ 31 Vizagapatam 9 London Sept. 11 Madras 15 Number of Persons on Board.—Passengers: Nil. Crew: 80 (British, 13; Natives, 67). 32 History of Case.—The patient, a lascar seaman, was taken ill on 26th August (temp. 103° F.) On 29th August pimples appeared on his face and body and he was isolated as a suspected case of Small-pox. On arrival at Suez the patient and his effects were landed to hospital and the Master of the vessel given to understand that it was a case of Chicken-pox. This diagnosis appears to have been revised, as the Bill of Health was endorsed "suspected Small-pox." As a precautionary measure, the whole of the crew were vaccinated and complete disinfection was carried out at Suez. The patient joined the ship at Calcutta and was ashore in Madras on 15th August, where apparently he contracted the infection of Small-pox. Action in London.—The vessel arrived off Gravesend at 5.40 p.m. on 11th September and was boarded by Dr. Kidd, who examined the whole of the crew; all were found to be well. The isolation hospital and crew's quarters were again fumigated with sulphur dioxide and washed down with a disinfecting solution. The whole of the crew, with the exception of the chief engineer, wireless operator and two apprentices, joined the ss. "Gallic" at Falmouth on 14th September. The natives travelled by charabanc and the Europeans by train from Paddington. The facts were forwarded to the Medical Officer of Health of Falmouth for his information. The names and addresses of those proceeding home were forwarded to the Medical Officers concerned. Chicken-pox on ss. "Somali." The ss. "Somali" arrived off Gravesend on 9th April and was boarded by Dr. Kidd. A native member of the crew had been landed at Colombo on 19th March, suffering from Chicken-pox. A second case was landed at Marseilles on 1st April. On arrival in London all the crew appeared to be well. The ship left London on 12th April and proceeded to Rotterdam, Dunkirk, Antwerp and back to London. During this voyage eight cases of Chicken-pox occurred. Three more cases occurred while the vessel was in this Port. This shows how an epidemic of Chicken-pox will run through a native crew. Presumably they are not immunised by exposure to infection in early life as most adults are in this country. Paratyphoid on ss. "Afric Star." The ss. "Afric Star" arrived off Gravesend on 22nd April from Buenos Aires, Rio Grande de Sol, Santos, San Sebastian and Teneriffe. She was boarded by Dr. Willoughby, who inspected the crew and found no evidence of infectious disease. Next day one of the crew was removed to the Royal Albert Dock Hospital as a suspected case of food poisoning. Later five more cases were removed. Three of the cases were subsequently diagnosed at Paratyphoid B. It appears that infection took place ashore, probably in Santos. V.—MEASURES AGAINST RODENTS. (1) Steps taken for the detection of rodent Plague:— (a) The Port Sanitary Authority employs six Assistant Rat Officers. Each Assistant Rat Officer has his own district, corresponding to the district of a Sanitary Inspector, under whose guidance he works. An Assistant Rat Officer's first duty is the examination of such ships in his district as are due for inspection under Article 28 of the International Sanitary Convention relative to the granting of Deratisation and Deratisation Exemption Certificates. His second duty is to visit ships arriving in his district from Plague-infected ports, to search for dead rats and, if possible, to obtain specimens of live rats trapped on board. He is required to re-visit such vessels daily during the discharge of cargo, to ascertain whether dead rats have been found in the holds. The existence of rodent Plague on board any vessel in the Port should thus be detected at the earliest possible moment. 33 (b) The Assistant Eat Officer's third duty is the examination of shore premises for signs of rat infestation or rat Plague, paying particular attention to premises adjoining the berths of vessels from Plague-infected ports. The whole of the Dock area is systematically and regularly inspected, and specimens of the shore rat population in all parts of the Port are regularly examined bacteriologically, so that, in the rare event of Plague infection being communicated to the rats on shore, it should be quickly detected and stamped out before it has spread extensively. Moreover, when rat-infestation of premises is reported, the responsible persons are required to take energetic measures of rat destruction, for rat Plague will spread rapidly in a rat-infested area, whereas where rats are few it may never spread at all. It is of the greatest importance, not only from the public health, but also from the commercial point of view, that the Port of London should be kept free from rat Plague. (2) Measures taken to prevent the passage of rats between ships and shore:— The Port of London Authority have made Bye-laws requiring the Master of every ship to cause all ropes and mooring tackle used for securing ships, either to the shore or mooring buoys, to be fitted with guards, approved by the Authority, to prevent rats passing from the ship to the shore, and to cause all empty cases, packages and barrels to be examined before landing, to ensure that no rats are contained therein. The removal of rats (alive or dead) from ships without previous consent in v/riting of the Superintendent is prohibited. Bye-laws also prescribe that, when the discharge or loading of cargo or the landing or embarking of passengers it not actually proceeding, one gangway, whitened for a length of 10 feet at the end next the vessel, may be used as a communication between the ship and the shore, and that the Master shall not have or allow any other communication with the shore, unless the same be fitted with guards, approved by the Authority, to prevent the passage of rats. These Bye-laws are enforced by the officers of the Port of London Authority, and the Sanitary Inspectors of the Port Sanitary Authority also call upon Masters to put guards on their mooring ropes. But the well-known difficulties in regard to the proper application and maintenance of position of rat-guards constantly occur, and it cannot be said that the mooring ropes of the majority of ships in the Port of London are at all times so guarded that a rat could not use them as a means of reaching the shore. There is no doubt that rats very seldom voluntarily run along mooring ropes, and the view is held that such rats as get ashore do so usually by some easier means or accidentally in cargo. (3) Methods of deratisation of:— (a) Ships. The methods employed for the deratisation of ships are:— (1) The burning of Sulphur at the rate of 3 lbs. per 1,000 cubic feet of space, the period of exposure of vessels to the Sulphur Dioxide gas thus generated being not less than six hours, and whenever time permits twelve hours or even longer. Roll Sulphur, of good quality, is used, and is burned in large shallow trays standing in larger trays containing water. Owing to the large burning surface thus obtained, considerably more Sulphur can be burned in one container within six hours than is possible when buckets or pots are used. Cylinders of liquid SO2 (Sulphume) are employed in small compartments and life-boats. (2) The generation of Hydrocyanic Acid Gas by various methods. For the destruction of rats a concentration of 0.2 per cent. of HCN is attempted, and the minimum period of exposure is two hours. If the fumigation is for the destruction of insect life, bed-bugs and cockroaches, two or three times this concentration is employed and the exposure is twelve to twenty-four hours, according to the time available. The methods of generating HCN employed are the spraying of liquid HCN, the scattering of "Zyklon 'B'" or "Celophite Units" and the pouring of liquid HCN into trays (Galardi process). "Celophite Units" are thin discs of wood pulp saturated with liquid HCN. Each unit holds half an ounce of liquid HCN and they are packed in strong containers each holding 32 discs. They provide an easy and 34 effective method of distributing HCN, since they can be "sailed" into 'tween decks or wings of holds, and they are also useful for the accurate dosage of small compartments. Moreover, the spent units can easily be collected and removed after the fumigation. In the hands of a competent Staff of fumigators all the methods mentioned are effective, and can be applied to small cargo vessels or large passenger liners without undue risk. But, if the fumigators are inexperienced or careless or there is imperfect organisation or lack of discipline, any method of Cyanide fumigation may not only be ineffective, but is very likely to result in fatal accidents. In London ships are fumigated only when the holds are empty, or very nearly so, except when there is definite evidence or strong suspicion of the existence of rodent Plague on board. In the latter event a preliminary fumigation with HCN would be undertaken immediately, whether the holds were full or partly discharged, with the object of destroying as many rats and fleas as possible and thus diminishing the risk of the spread of the infection to the shore rats. But, since complete deratisation of a loaded ship cannot be guaranteed, the vessel would be again fumigated throughout when empty. During the year the Ministry of Health, assisted by the Imperial College of Science and the Port Sanitary Authority, carried out a careful investigation in the Port of London into ''The Efficacy of the Open Method of Burning Sulphur for the Fumigation of Unloaded Ships." A full report was submitted to the October Meeting of the Permanent Committee of the Office International d'Hygiene Publique in Paris. The general conclusions were as follows:— "The experiments—the conditions of which were severe—show that in the fumigation of an empty ship by burning good quality Sulphur in trays (in the proportion of 3 lbs. of Sulphur per 1,000 cubic feet of space) a lethal concentration of Sulphur Dioxide is reached and maintained for more than the corresponding lethal period. Places where it is obvious that gas will hardly penetrate must be thoroughly opened up. If an empty ship is properly prepared for fumigation by the opening up of closed spaces, either Sulphur Dioxide or Hydrogen Cyanide will prove an efficient fumigant, but if the ship is not properly prepared, neither gas will be completely effective." "It seems clear to us that whilst individual Authorities should be left a full discretion as to the particular method they prefer to adopt, all Authorities can safely accept the open method of burning Sulphur as a practical and efficient means for the fumigation of empty ships in order adequately to meet the requirements of Article 28 of the International Sanitary Convention." (3) Trapping. All vessels from Plague-infected ports are required to have traps set on board, in order that specimens may, if possible, be obtained for bacteriological examination. All other vessels, on which there is evidence of rats, but not of such a number as to justify a demand for fumigation, are required to have traps set in all spaces where signs of rats are discovered. The trapping may be carried out by professional rat-catchers or, in some cases, by members of the crew, under the supervision of the officers of the Port Sanitary Authority. (b) Premises in the vicinity of Docks and Quays. The Port of London Authority constantly carry out methods of rat destruction ashore in the Port. Trapping is the method principally employed, but the Authority are always ready to test any new method of rat-destruction that is brought to their notice. The condition of all shore premises is under the constant supervision of the Sanitary Inspectors and Assistant Eat Officers of the Port Sanitary Authority, who draw the attention of the officers of the Port of London Authority to any signs of rat-infestation they may discover. (4) Measures taken for the detection of rat prevalence in ships and on shore:— Examination by Inspectors and Assistant Eat Officers, as already described. (5) Bat-proofing:— (a) To what extent are Docks, Wharves, Warehouses, &c., rat-proof? London and St. Katharine Docks.—Assistant Eat Officer Woodrow reports a great improvement in the measures taken to reduce the number of rats both by trapping and by rat-proofing. In the St. Katharine Dock the warehouses are old and not of rat-proof construction, but the Port of London Authority carry out trapping very effectively. The London Dock is being progressively modernized and the new sheds and warehouses are being constructed on rat-proof lines. Trapping is vigorously carried out with good results. Regent's Canal Dock provides some difficulty on account of the proximity of the Canal. For a time the Dock sheds will be clear of rats and then a new invasion will occur. In the opinion of Assistant Eat Officer Woodrow, rats are most commonly imported in crated goods, as he frequently observes rat-holes in the packing between the battens forming the crates. Surrey Commercial Docks.—Assistant Eat Officer Moody reports that the rat population of these Docks is very small. Only one warehouse gave trouble, but being too old a building to rat-proof it was thoroughly trapped and is now almost free of rats. The number of rats in the timber sheds and open spaces has been reduced partly by trapping and partly by cats which are half wild and roam about the Dock. West India and Millwall Docks.—Assistant Eat Officer Croft reports that many of the buildings in these Docks are old, have wooden floors and provide considerable rat harbourage. The rat population is kept down by constant trapping and by not storing rat attractive cargo in the oldest buildings. New construction is on rat-proof lines. East India Dock and Royal Victoria Dock.—Assistant Eat Officer Boult reports that the rat population was successfully kept down by trapping and poisoning. Attention was paid to store-rooms, and both stores and cargo were kept away from the sides of sheds and warehouses so that evidence of rats could be seen at once and traps be set effectively. Royal Albert and King George V. Docks.—Assistant Eat Officer Watkins reports that two more of the few remaining wooden floors in the Royal Albert Dock were replaced by concrete during the year. Constant trapping and poisoning were carried out with good results. The King George V. Dock is modern and practically rat-proof. Tilbury Docks.—Assistant Eat Officer Wilkins reports that during the past three years a considerable amount of rat-proofing has been carried out and the number of rats has diminished. But the number of mice has increased because of the storage of waste-paper in all available empty sheds. There are 35 sheds in the Dock, 20 of which are quite free of rats, 8 show some indications of rats and in 7 sheds mice are found. There is close co-operation between the Staffs of the Port of London Authority and the Port Sanitary Authority, and evidence of rats is promptly reported and recommendations are carefully followed. (b) Action taken to extend Bat-proofing:— (i.) In Ships:— On the 24th November, 1933, I read before a Meeting of the Association of Port Sanitary Authorities the following Paper, which was illustrated by lantern slides. Every Sanitary Inspector has studied the rat-proofing of ships on the lines indicated in the Paper and a considerable amount of useful work has been done, particularly in the opening-up of pipe casings and other harbourages and in stopping rat runs:— "THE EAT PROOFING OF SHIPS. "Most of the Members of this Association are perfectly familiar with the meaning of rat-proofing both ashore and afloat, but as there may be one or two present here to-day to whom the subject is comparatively new, I propose, with your permission, to begin at the beginning by defining rat-proofing and explaining its importance before I proceed to the discussion of its application in ships. 36 "Rat-proofing means eliminating enclosed spaces in which rats might nest and breed, or at least making such spaces inaccessible to rats, and preventing the access of rats to supplies of food and water. "Potential nesting or breeding places are termed rat-harbourage. A house is still a house even if it is unoccupied, and so rat-harbourage is still rat-harbourage even if at the time of inspection no rats are making use of it. This statement appears to be so obvious as to be unnecessary, but I have found difficulty in getting Inspectors to report rat-harbourage unless there is actual evidence of the presence of rats. "It is usually easier, particularly in ships, to eliminate or protect rat-harbourage than to cut off supplies of food and water. Sometimes it is easier to prevent rats obtaining water than to deny them access to food. The complete programme of rat-proofing comprises the prevention of nesting, feeding and drinking, but if it is not practicable to do all three it is worth while depriving the rat of two, or even only one, of these necessities of life. "I think it is generally agreed that rat-proofing is the only rat-repressive measure which is permanent in its effects. It is very difficult completely to annihilate a rat colony by trapping, poisoning or even fumigation. Usually there are a few survivors, and rats are so prolific that they quickly breed up to the limits of the nesting accommodation and the food supply. But even if every rat in a building or a ship is destroyed it is certain that good homes for rats will not remain long untenanted, and the methods of deratisation must be repeated again and again at regular intervals. "I think it is true to say that the majority of rats in ships are born on board and that every ship has a certain maximum rat capacity. I am aware that from time to time we do get sudden invasions of ships by large numbers of rats, but this is the exception and not the rule. I know, too, that there is a certain interchange between rats ashore and those afloat. But at the same time I feel sure that rats do not voluntarily leave a comfortable home. Increase of population or scarcity of food supply may enforce migration. I suppose there are some rats who are naturally wanderers, and perhaps romance or domestic difficulties may cause others to leave home. I understand also that on the occurrence of a severe epizootic of rodent plague rats will flee from the infected area. But I think that rats who are well housed and well fed will settle down to a comfortable family life and have large litters at frequent intervals. Our best method of waging war on rats is therefore to present them with an acute housing problem and a food shortage. Then we may be sure that their birth rate will go down and their infant mortality and general death rates will go up. "In ships rat-proofing has an additional advantage in that it increases the efficiency of fumigation. There are in many ships, spaces which are accessible to rats, but to which no fumigating gas, not even hydrogen cyanide, can penetrate in lethal concentration during any ordinary fumigation. So much has heen said of the toxicity of hydrogen cyanide and of the danger to human life in cyanide fumigations that I find a tendency on the part of shipping people to believe that the gas will penetrate everywhere and kill everything. But in actual fact no fumigant will get through small openings into comparatively large dead spaces where there is no movement of air, for the physical process of diffusion is relatively slow and the distribution of a fumigating gas through a ship depends very largely on internal air currents or draughts inside the ship, set up by differences of temperature and wind pressures. Such dead spaces are precisely those chosen by rats for nesting and for hiding when they are disturbed, as they frequently are during the daytime when a vessel is in port. For effective fumigation such spaces must be opened up to enable the gas to enter. It is obviously better to eliminate these harbourages or to make it impossible for rats to get into them. "There is another important advantage in rat-proofing. It has been shown by Eskey, of the United States Public Health Service, during plague investigations in Peru and Ecuador, that the degree of flea infestation of rats is proportional to the density of the rat population and that the ' cheopis index ' is highest where there is the best rat-harbourage. Thus rat-proofing is a double insurance against bubonic plague, not only reducing the number of rats, but also reducing the number of fleas, and particularly of X. cheopis, on such rats as may survive. "The broad principles of rat-proofing are quite simple. They are:— "(1) Eliminate all enclosed spaces which might be used by rats for hiding or nesting, or if it is impracticable to eliminate such spaces, protect them, with galvanised sheet metal or expanded metal of not more than half-inch mesh, so that rats cannot get into them. "(2) Close all openings through which rats might pass from one compartment to another in search of food or water or to escape from fumigating gases. "Rats seldom gnaw on flat surfaces, but nearly always at edges, corners or angles, and therefore it is these points that need attention in protective work. "Before I proceed to consider the detail of the application of these principles I must acknowledge the main source of such information as I possess. Some eighteen months ago I went to New York and spent several days with Mr. B. E. Holsendorf, who is the officer in charge of the Rat-proofing division of the Quarantine Department. Mr. Holsendorf has spent years in the study of the rat-proofing of ships and has worked out all the practical details in co-operation with naval architects and shipbuilders. I visited with Mr. Holsendorf, ships which had been rat-proofed in commission and ships which were being rat-proofed during construction. He kindly gave me copies of his book," The Rat-proofing of Vessels," and a number of photographs. Such of the photographs as could be reproduced have been made into lantern slides by Dr. Newham, of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Mr. Gillis, of my own office staff, has enlarged some of the most useful drawings from Mr. Holsendorf's book and slides have been made from these by Dr. Newham. So far as the text of the rest of this Paper is concerned I have endeavoured to pick out the principal recommendations from Mr. Holsendorf's book and to explain them to the best of my 37 ability. I could not, even if there were time, give you every detail, but it seems to me that with a clear understanding of the principles involved, careful observation and common sense, it should be possible, on the spot and in co-operation with an interested Marine Superintendent or Ship's Officer, to make useful recommendations in regard to any rat-proofing problem which may arise. The proposals put forward refer to new construction and may not be applicable to existing ships, but they will serve as a standard which should be approached as nearly as is reasonably practicable and necessary in each case. We cannot go ahead at the pace which has been set in New York by the enthusiasm and expert knowledge of Mr. Holsendorf. We must proceed more slowly, taking the shipping companies with us. But appreciation of the value of rat-proofing is spreading amongst marine superintendents and ship's officers, and it is possible to get much good work done when there is evidence of rats; when there is no evidence we can at the present stage deal only with the more obvious and easily corrected harbourage. Nevertheless, even in the absence of ratinfestation, I think harbourage should be recorded on Deratisation Exemption Certificates. We must not let shipowners consider that their ships are rat-proof because no harbourage is recorded on Form Port 11. Nor must we expose ourselves to criticism abroad for failure to complete these certificates properly. "My instructions to my own Inspectors are as follows: 'In every compartment say to yourself, is this compartment rat-proof? If your answer is 'No' then put down all the reasons why it is not rat-proof, including all rat-harbourage and all potential rat runs from one compartment to another. If the ship is rat-free you may be content simply to record the conditions, which will be entered on the Exemption Certificate, and to draw the attention of the marine superintendent or the master to the desirability of rat-proofing. If on the other hand there is evidence of rat-infestation you should not only point out defects, but endeavour to get as many as possible corrected.' "I will first of all describe the principal defects as regards rat-proofing in ships and suggest how they should be dealt with in new construction. Then I will suggest what should be done in regard to ships in commission, but every opportunity should be taken to approach as nearly as possible to the recommendations for new ships. I will deal with the sections systematically beginning with the holds, but you will appreciate that each ship has its own particular problems which provide scope for the inductive and constructive reasoning of the Inspector. "Holds'—Ceiling over Tank Tops and Bilges.—In many ships there is a wooden flooring, termed the ceiling, over the top of the double-bottom tanks, raised on battens one to two inches thick. The space between this wooden ceiling and the tank tops forms ideal rat-harbourage. The remedy is to omit the wooden ceiling altogether or to fit the planks closely to the tank top and bed them in Stockholm tar or cement. "If fuel oil is carried in the tanks the Ship Classification Societies require the ceiling to be raised on battens one-and-a-half to two inches thick. In these cases, or if for any other reason ceilings cannot be eliminated, they should be fitted tightly and protected from gnawing by strips of galvanised sheet metal six inches wide, at all angles and edges, and also where stanchions, pillars or pipes pass through them. "There is often access to the space under the ceiling from the bilges at the margin plate. This access should be closed by a flange of sheet metal perforated so as to allow drainage along the tank tops into the bilges. Sometimes there is no wooden ceiling over the bottom of the holds, but only a cargo pad under the hatches. This should be flashed with metal all round the edges if there is rat-harbourage underneath. "Spaces between Frames at Ship's Side—Lower Hold.—At the ship's side, in the lower holds, the space between the frames is commonly closed by light wooden fillers covered with a thin layer of cement, which frequently gets broken, providing holes through which rats can get into the bilges. Either the ceiling should be made tight round the frames and the edges be flashed with metal, or the concrete filling should be at least two inches thick and be reinforced with expanded metal or wire mesh. "Permanent Wooden Bulkheads.—If permanent wooden bulkheads are required to protect cargo from tank leakage there is harbourage between the wooden and the steel bulkheads. The wooden bulkhead must therefore be of thick, tongued-and-grooved boarding, fitted snugly and flashed all round the edges and where pipes or structural members pass through. An open sparred type of bulkhead installed in a horizontal manner on vertical framing is preferable. "Pipe Casings, &c.—There are always pipes running through holds, and these must be protected against damage from cargo. Commonly they are completely boxed in with wood, forming ideal ratharbourage and a means by which rats may get from one compartment to another. Pipes may be vertical or horizontal. In the case of vertical pipes or overhead horizontal pipes the protection should be of open type construction, either wooden spar type or face board type of flat or half-round steel batten type. In the case of pipes on the bottom of the hold it may be necessary to box them in completely. This should be done with steel, or if with wood, all edges should be flashed with metal. "Pillars.—Pillars or girders may be cased: again an open type of casing should be used. There may be lightening holes in pillar foundations. These should be protected. At the top of pillars there may be wide shelf-like compensating plates to which rats have access via the beams, and where they may nest. This space may be filled in with cement. "Openings for Pipes.—Holes through bulkheads for pipes, &c., are frequently cut too large and afford passage for rats. These openings should be closed by a sheet metal collar round the pipe. If the pipe is insulated, and the insulation is a half-inch or more thick and is continued through the bulkhead, rats might get through by gnawing away the insulation. To prevent this a sheet metal cylinder should be fitted round the insulation for twelve inches on each side of the bulkhead. "Permanent Ballast should be stowed in rat-proofed casings. 38 "Fresh-water Tanks are commonly situated in the' tween decks abaft the engine-room bulkhead. There is often about six inches between the tank and the deck and between the tank and the bulkhead, and also the ship's side. Either the tank should be set well away from the deck, bulkhead and ship's side, or else the space should be made inaccessible to rats by expanded metal. "Insulated Cargo Spaces—Rats frequently burrow into the insulation and are there safe from ordinary fumigations. The insulation should be covered with strong wire screening of half-inch or finer mesh. This should be overlapped at joints and corners or all edges and corners should be flashed with sheet metal, as it is just these places which are likely to be neglected and which the rats instinctively attack. There should also be flashing round pipes, beams, girders, &c., which go through the insulation. Wooden sheathing, whether at sides, deckhead or elsewhere, should be flashed with sheet metal at edges and angles and where pierced by pipes, beams, &c. "The openings of cold air trunks should be screened with expanded metal. "If some material impervious to gnawing by rats could be employed for sheathing all flashing would, of course, be rendered unnecessary. "Fore and After Peaks are frequently rat-infested. Hatch covers should be tight fitting. There should be facilities for open and orderly stowage of stores. If flooring is required this should take the form of gratings in easily handled sections, constructed flush on both sides and fitted closely so that there is nospace for rats underneath. Shelving should be of the sparred type. Lockers or bins should be of metal, or if of wood should be flashed with metal wherever exposed to gnawing. "Permanent and Reserve Coal Bunkers.—Wooden flooring should be omitted wherever practicable. If flooring is required it should be closely fitted, and all edges be flashed. "Engine Room.—Lockers and storerooms should be of metal; avoid placing them in dark corners. The lightening holes in the bases or foundations of motors, &c., afford access for rats to the enclosed space underneath. These openings should be screened. "Baggage and Mail Rooms.—A fixed hollow floor should be avoided. Snugly fitted gratings, flush on both sides, and in small sections, should be fitted. Doors should be tight fitting, shelving should be of the sparred type, and all permanent openings should be screened. "Passenger Accommodation.—Harbourage for rats exists between sheathing and the side of the ship; in overhead deck spaces; in double walls or partitions and behind panelling, and in certain fittings. Rats usually get into these spaces through holes for pipes, beams, &c. Therefore avoid double wall construction as far as possible and otherwise block off the internal spaces at all ends and partition points by installing sheet metal or wire mesh across the space. If spaces are over twenty-five feet long block them off at intermediate points. "Avoid open spaces above or below partition bulkheads, panneling, &c. If openings are necessary for ventilation close them with expanded metal. "Fit metal collars where pipes pierce bulkheads or partitions, paying particular attention to bathrooms and lavatory compartments to which rats go for water. "Avoid rat-harbourage in furniture and fittings; thus instal open settees instead of boxed seats; put cupboards, lockers, wardrobes, &c., flat on the deck and up to the ceiling or have a sloping top. If rats might gnaw into dead spaces in furniture flash with metal the part where gnawing might take place. "Wooden berths of boxed type in officers' quarters should be replaced by metal beds with metal drawers under. "Crew Accommodation.—The same principles apply—avoid double walls, make bulkheads and partitions complete above and below with expanded metal if necessary, have all fittings of metal and screen openings for pipes, &c. "Galleys.—If the deckhead is insulated flash with metal where pipes or structural members go through. Where there are half-height bulkheads between compartments these should be carried up to the deckhead with expanded metal of not more than half-inch mesh. The expanded metal should fit closely round any pipes, or metal collars should be fitted. "Openings into the ventilating system should be screened. "Fittings should be well away from bulkheads or flush up to them and close down to decks, or with a clear space of ten inches underneath. Protect refrigerators and ice boxes. "Store-Rooms.—As in other Stores—avoid wooden flooring and substitute gratings if necessary; shelves should be of sparred type; all lockers, bins, &c., should be of metal. Avoid dead space above, below or behind lockers; screen openings for pipes, ventilators, &c. "Miscellaneous Fittings—Ventilation.—All openings into the ventilating ducts should be screened as rats may use these as a means of communication between compartments. Cowls and blowers have been used by rats as a means of entry, and though they are not commonly so used, they may with advantage be screened. Torpedo ventilators may provide a means of access to living accommodation if they are situated in close relation to pipes and beams. They should, therefore, either be screened or be so placed that rats cannot reach them. In the interior, ventilation trunks should not be so placed in relation to beams or the deckhead as to provide rat-harbourage, but if any enclosed space is so formed it should be screened. Obviously trunkways circular in section are less likely to form a convenient shelf for rats than trunks which are rectangular. 39 "Pipes.—In passenger vessels the mass of pipes running overhead along alleyways forms not only a convenient rat-run, but also a nesting place. If the pipes are spaced out this is avoided, otherwise screening may be necessary. "Casings for Electric Cables, Signal Wires and Telegraph Wires, &c., should be of metal, and closed at ends, or should be of some open type construction. "Fire Boxes, Switchboard Boxes, &c., frequently provide harbourage with communications along pipes, &c. These should be of metal construction or at least be flashed with metal wherever gnawing is possible and where pipes or cables enter them. "Deck Lockers for Life Belts, &c., should be of metal in preference to wood, and be set directly on the deck or on a solid base, or with a clear space of at least ten inches underneath. If of wood the bottom and edges, where gnawing is possible, should be flashed with sheet metal. "These are the principal items requiring attention in the rat-proofing of ships under construction. Though they set a standard to which we should endeavour to approach as nearly as possible, we shall usually have to be satisfied with much less in ships already in commission, and I will therefore indicate what we may reasonably hope to achieve in the latter. "Ships in Commission.—All wooden floorings and limber boards should be examined, and such as are broken or defective should be repaired or replaced. "Ceilings in holds, unless tightly butted, should be flashed at edges and around pillars, frames, pipes, &c. "The space between wooden ceilings and tank tops should, if sufficiently deep to afford rat-harbourage, be screened from the bilges at the margin plates as already described for, as has recently been shown in experiments carried out by the Ministry of Health with the assistance of the Imperial College of Science and Technology, neither hydrogen cyanide nor sulphur dioxide can get into this space in measurable amounts during an ordinary fumigation. "The cement filling between frames at ship's side must be kept in good repair. "Box type wooden casings over pipes, &c., should be replaced by one of the open type casings described. If this cannot be done the wooden casings must be kept in good repair and be flashed with sheet metal six inches wide at top and bottom. If such casings do not extend from the ceiling or deck to the deckhead the ends must be closed with sheet metal flashing. "Metal flanges or collars should be fitted where pipes pass through decks or bulkheads if there is room for a rat to get through. "Doors, particularly in store rooms and galleys, must be made rat-tight, and the bottoms and the thresholds be flashed with metal if exposed to gnawing. "Careful attention should be paid to the sheathing over insulation. "Lockers, bins, cupboards, &c., should be replaced by metal structures if they are in bad condition. In any case they must be kept in good repair, and be flashed where exposed to gnawing. Bat-harbourage above and below must be eliminated or protected. "Boxed seats and settees should at least be fitted with lids or covers. The interior should be sheathed with metal if there is a hollow wall or floor construction behind or below. Metal collars should be fitted round the openings for any pipes running through the enclosed spaces. "Forepeaks and afterpeaks should be treated as far as possible on the lines previously indicated. "Broken or defective or badly fitting hatch covers must be repaired or replaced. "All wooden partitions must be kept in good repair and flashed with metal where pipes, beams, &c., pass through. Hollow partitions must be flashed on both sides at edges if exposed to gnawing. "Openings between partitions and the deck or deckhead should be closed with wire mesh or perforated sheet metal. "Finally, all refuse which might be food for rats should be cleared up promptly and put in rat-proof bins until it can be finally disposed of. It is desirable that the crew should have messrooms with metal food lockers, and that no food should be consumed or stored in their sleeping quarters. It is remarkable how many rats can be fed on scraps of food left on floors, tables, &c., overnight, and how much can be done to reduce the number of rats by cleanliness and tidiness. "I agree with Mr. Holsendorf that the correction of rat-harbourage should be indicated on certificates by the words 'eliminated' or 'protected' as the case may be. When harbourage has been eliminated it appears to me that in subsequent certificates the word 'none' must appear in the rat-harbourage column. But I agree that harbourage which is only protected should continue to appear on certificates with the word 'protected' in the 'corrected' column, provided the protection is in good repair and efficient, because it may break down at any time. Mr. Holsendorf suggests that we should record 'protected' harbourage as 'inactive.' If we use this word at all we should use it also in regard to uncorrected ratharbourage which is not being used by rats'at the time of inspection. The word 'temporary' in regard to harbourage seems to me unsatisfactory, and personally I think the best plan is to indicate briefly on certificates the nature of the harbourage, because in this way ship's officers and others will learn what the defects are, and will be the more likely to take an interest in rat-proofing. A great deal can be and is already being done by ship's carpenters under the direction of ship's officers. Such entries can be made on the large forms of certificates we use, but, unfortunately, on the single sheets used by other countries the space is too limited. 40 "In New York ships are furnished with a schedule of rat-proofing work required. We have not reached that stage yet. But, as many of you are aware, a Sub-Committee of the Joint Sanitary Committee of the Chamber of Shipping of the United Kingdom and the Liverpool Steamship Owners' Association has been appointed to study and report upon the rat-proofing of ships. I do not know what stage their deliberations have reached, but I have reason to believe that they are fully alive to the importance of rat-proofing, and I have no doubt that their report will not only be of the greatest value to the shipping industry, but of the greatest assistance to us. When this report has been issued, and has been studied by Shipping Companies, we may even be asked to prepare schedules of the work necessary to make individual ships rat-proof. I submit, therefore, that this Association should devote close attention to this subject and that we should take every opportunity to pool our knowledge, our experience and our ideas in regard to the rat-proofing of ships." (ii.) On Shore:— The Port of London Authority fully appreciate the value of rat-proofing, and have issued instructions that all new work is to be structurally rat-proof. Every recommendation of the Port Sanitary Authority receives careful consideration and, while reconstruction goes steadily on, everything possible is done to keep the rat population down to a minimum in the older parts of the Docks. Rat Flea Survey. During the year Dr. Kean continued the Rat Flea Survey he commenced last year, and reports as follows:— During the year ended January, 1934, an extension of the investigation into the parasitic fleas of rats trapped in the Port was conducted. The investigation was governed, in detail, by such conditions as were observed during the conduct of the Rat Flea Survey for the year 1932-33. The area investigated was that of the six zones into which, for the purpose of rat-control, the Port Sanitary area has been divided. Observations on Rats. As in the preceding year, the recording of the species of rat under the heading "Black Rat" or "Brown Rat" has been adhered to, and no attempt has been made at a fine differentiation. The report deals with the results of the examination of a total of 366 rats. This number is composed of 180 brown and 186 black rats. Of the total, 127 rats were found to be free from parasitic fleas. Flea-free rats were encountered most frequently during the winter months, their numbers becoming gradually less with the onset of the warm weather. The accompanying Table shows the percentages of flea-free rats met with during the respective months of the period under review:— 1933. 1934. Feb. March. April. May. June. July. Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. 37.5 46.6 36.3 44.6 35.2 14.2 15.7 34.6 25.6 39.9 40 57.5 Per cent. The greatest number of rats (130) was obtained from Zone B. Zones C and E supplied 99 and 84 respectively. On 11th September, 1933, a black male rat was trapped in No. 8 Warehouse, South West India Dock. On examination this rat was found to have been harbouring a solitary Xenopsylla cheopis male flea. This flea was forthwith submitted to the Department of Entomology of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine for verification of the identification. The identification was confirmed. On 26th September two brown rats and one black rat were captured in this warehouse. One of the brown rats, a male, was found to be infested with 13 fleas, which were identified as follows: X. cheopis 1 male: C. fasciatus 4 male: Leptopsylla 8 male. The adjacent berth is principally used by ships from India and the Persian Gulf. Special attention was devoted to this area, but no further specimens of X. cheopis 41 were obtained. The Sanitary Inspector in charge of the district made a careful inspection of the premises and also prepared a plan of the warehouses. This inspection failed to reveal any local nidus which might, on account of its nature, provide harbourage and favourable breeding facilities for Xenopsylla cheopis. Observations on Pleas. The average number of fleas per rat for the whole period was 2'49, the number increasing from 1.00 per rat in April to 4.02 per rat in August; after which there was a gradual monthly decline up to November. December, however, showed an increase to 3.80 fleas per rat, but this figure was not maintained during the following cold period. Ceratophyllus fasciatus was again found to be the predominant rat flea, its numbers representing 85.11 per cent. of all fleas examined during the period under review. Its incidence, as represented by the C. fasciatus index, reached its zenith in December with a figure of 3.52. The next highest figure was recorded during the month of August. The lowest figure, 0.9, is shown for the month of April, but if the small number of rats (11) examined during this month be considered, the figure may lose some of its significance. Leptopsylla musculi.—Next to C. fasciatus this was the flea most frequently encountered. It represents 14.11 per cent. of the total fleas examined. During August its numbers represented 23 per cent. of the total fleas. September showed a rise to 43 per cent. and October a drop to 26 per cent. In November a maximum percentage of 46 was reached. Occasional specimens were met with during the winter months. Ctenocephalus felis.—This species is represented by three specimens which were obtained from two rats at different times and from different zones. XenopsyUa cheopis.—Two specimens were encountered under the circumstances already detailed. Pulexiritans and Ceratophyllus londiniensis.—No specimen of either was met with in the course of the survey. All fleas examined were submitted to the Department of Entomology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, for confirmation of the identifications. Ship Eats. Since the inception of the rat flea survey, attention has been paid to ship rats in order to determine their degree of flea infestation and also the variety of fleas harboured. With this in view, rats from ships whose ports of call included actual or potential Plague areas were periodically taken and examined. In all cases where rats were taken in traps only those trapped singly were examined, and their attendant fleas were obtained as in the manner adopted for the shore rats. In some cases when a ship had undergone Cyanide fumigation the dead rats were collected, the near vicinity of the dead rat being carefully searched for fleas which might have fallen from the dying rat. The rat was afterwards examined in the usual way and any fleas which had been found in the vicinity were added to those obtained by combing. During the year ended January, 1933, twenty black rats and one brown rat were trapped singly in different ships. Of this number, 16 rats were found to be free from fleas. The remaining 5 rats yielded altogether 13 fleas, all C. fasciatus. During the year ended January, 1934, 68 black rats and one brown rat were taken from ships and examined. Of these 69 rats, only 5 were found to be harbouring fleas. The total number of fleas obtained from them was 39, of which 21 were found to be X. cheopis and 18 C. fasciatus. 42 Particulars concerning those rats found to be harbouring X. cheopis are as follows :— Date. Rat. Species and Sex. Dock. First Port of Loading. Fleas. X. Cheopis. C. Fasciatus. 5/7/33 Black, Male Royal Victoria Vancouver 3 Male 1 Male. 26/10/33 Ditto Ditto Cuba 4 Femal Nil. 26/10/33 Black, Female Ditto Braila 6 Male 1 Male. 7 Female 4 Female. 27/10/33 Ditto Ditto Braila 1 Female 1 Male. 6 Female. All the above rats were caught singly in traps. Conclusions. It appears that though to some small extent X. cheopis fleas are found on ship rats in the Port, it is only in very rare instances that such fleas persist ashore. They certainly do not multiply on the shore rat population, and if the spread of rodent Plague ashore depends on X. cheopis, the Port of London should be practically immune from any danger of a rat epizootic. 43 TABLE SHOWING RATS EXAMINED BY ZONES, SPECIES AND MONTHS. Zones 1933. February March April May June July August September October November December 1934. January Total for whole period. Bl. Br. Bl. Br. Bl. Br. Bl. Br. Bl. Br. Bl. Br. Bl. Br. Bl. Br. Bl. Br. Bl. Br. Bl. Br. Bl. Br. A. 2 - - - - - 3 - 2 - 4 - 5 3 3 1 5 3 1 1 - - 1 - 34 B. 8 4 1 5 2 3 — 2 - - — — — — — 2 27 26 17 8 14 10 - 1 130 C. — — 2 1 2 3 5 9 1 3 — 3 3 5 3 5 5 10 5 9 — 1 22 2 99 D. - - — — — - — — - — 2 1 1 2 1 4 — 1 1 — — — 1 3 17 E. — 1 1 5 — — 10 18 5 6 3 1 6 13 3 4 — 1 4 — — — 3 — 84 F. 1 - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 11 5 4 11 5 6 18 29 8 9 9 5 15 23 10 16 37 41 28 18 14 11 27 6 366 Totals 16 15 11 47 17 14 38 26 78 46 25 33 TABLE SHOWING TOTALS OF DIFFERENT SPECIES OF FLEAS EXAMINED EACH MONTH. Species 1933. February March April May June July August September October November December 1934. January Totals C. fasciatus 43 25 10 119 34 25 124 39 142 50 88 78 777 L. musculi — — 1 4 2 6 29 17 38 23 7 4 131 C. agyrtes — — — — — — — — — — — — — C. felis — — — — — — — 1 2 — — — 3 X. cheopis — — — — — — — 2 — — — — 2 C. londiniensis — — — — — - — — — — — — — Totals 43 25 11 123 36 31 153 59 182 73 95 82 913 TABLE SHOWING C. FASCIATUS AND TOTAL-FLEA INDICES EACH MONTH. 1933. February March April May June July August September October November December 1934. January C. fasciatus index 2.68 1.66 0.90 2.53 2.00 1.78 3.26 1.50 1.82 1.08 3.52 2.36 Total index 2.68 1.66 1.00 2.61 2.11 2.21 4.02 2.26 2.33 1.58 3.80 2.54 44 Rats Destroyed during 1933. TABLE E. (1) On Vessels. Number of Jan. Feb. Mar. April. May. June. July. Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Total in Year Black Rats 90 77 50 20 63 41 31 19 61 67 41 67 627 Brown Rats — 2 1 3 2 — 6 — — — 7 2 23 Species not Recorded 420 152 99 228 205 498 514 152 124 448 76 341 3,257 Rats examined 90 79 51 23 65 41 37 19 61 67 48 69 650 Rats infected with Plague nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil See also Appendices XXVI. and XXVII. TABLE F. (2) In Docks, Quays, Wharves and Warehouses. Number of Jan. Feb. Mar. April. May. June. July. Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Total inYear. Black Rats 29 21 27 12 28 7 12 20 38 79 52 45 370 Brown Rats 94 81 93 57 114 53 52 39 69 110 137 108 1,007 Species not Recorded 229 216 154 349 285 295 380 244 335 371 319 357 3,534 Rats examined 123 102 120 69 142 60 64 59 107 189 189 153 1,377 Rats infected with Plague nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil RATS EXAMINED—Vessels, Docks, Quays, &c. 2,027 See also Appendices XXVI. and XXVII. TABLE G. Measures of Rat Destruction on Plague "Infected" or "Suspected" Vessels or Vessels from Plague Infected Ports arriving in the Port during the Year. Total Number of such Vessels arriving. Number of such Vessels fumigated by S02. Number of Rats Killed. Number of such Vessels fumigated by HCN. Number of Rats Killed. Number of such Vessels on which Trapping, Poisoning, &c., were employed. Number of Rats Killed. Number of such Vessels on which measures of Rat Destruction were not carried out. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 2,408 58 713 59 1,181 1,390 1,553 1,018 (231 mice.) (62 mice.) TABLE H. Deratisation Certificates and Deratisation Exemption Certificates issued during the Year. NET TONNAGE. Number of Ships. Number of Deratisation Certificates Issued. Number of Deratisation Exemption Certificates issued. Total Certificates issued. After Fumigation with. After Trapping, Poisoning, &c. Total. HCN. Sulphur. HCN. and Sulphur. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Ships up to 300 tons 175 — — — — Nil. 175 175 „ from 301 „ to 1,000 tons 265 — l — — 1 264 265 „ „ 1,001 „ „ 3,000 „ 188 7 16 — l 24 164 188 „ „ 3,001 „ „ 10,000 „ 358 47 51 — — 98 260 358 „ over 10,000 „ 41 13 — — — 13 28 41 Totals 1,027 67 68 — l 136 891 1,027 45 VI.—HYGIENE OF CREWS' SPACES. TABLE J.—Classification of Nuisances. Nationality of Vessel. Number inspected during the year. Defects of original construction. Structural defects through wear and tear. Dirt, Vermin and other condition prejudicial to health. British 9,855 45 484 2,087 The hygiene of crews' spaces receives the constant attention of the Sanitary Inspectors of the Port Sanitary Authority, all of whom have sea-going experience as officers in the Mercantile Marine. Insanitary conditions due to dirt, vermin, dampness, defective heating, defective ventilation and foul water-closets are frequently encountered and remedied. There is scope for much improvement in the original construction of crew accommodation in both passenger and cargo ships. The Association of Port Sanitary Authorities and the Manning Committee of the Shipping Federation have made valuable recommendations, but so long as the quarters comply with the Board of Trade "Instructions as to the Survey of Masters' and Crews' Spaces in Ships," Port Sanitary Authorities cannot interfere. In a period of intense depression in the shipping industry, shipowners cannot be expected to undertake structural alterations in existing ships, but in new construction designers and builders should devote more attention to the living quarters for the crew. In no class of ship, from the luxury liner to the humble tramp, has sanitation afloat kept pace with sanitation ashore in equivalent types of accommodation. It must be admitted that in ships there are special conditions which necessitate caution in following shore practice, but it does seem that shipbuilders might with advantage be less conservative in this respect. The facts that the Port of London extends over such a wide area and that Foodstuffs may be landed at almost any point makes it impossible to divide the Staff strictly into Food Inspectors and Sanitary Inspectors. There are certain parts of the Docks where the nature and quantity of the Foodstuffs landed are such that a wholetime Food Inspector is essential, but there are many districts where the food inspection and sanitary inspection must be combined. For this reason every Sanitary Inspector in the Port of London is required to qualify as a Food Inspector, and at the present time ten of the total Staff of twelve Inspectors are qualified in both respects. So great are the food imports in London that it is obviously impossible for everything to come under inspection. At the same time, the control is greater than might at first appear possible, for Inspectors have not only the information contained in the Customs Bill of Entry at their disposal, but, from the fact that they are constantly on the Docks, they have many sources of information open to them, and they receive the assistance of Customs Officers and others. From experience also, they know what has proved consistently sound and what needs their careful attention. They recognise what is new, and therefore to be carefully examined. Above all, they receive every assistance from the importers, who do not wish to put food of even doubtful quality on the market. There is, however, another way in which a Port Sanitary Authority may act if, from their own observation or from reports received from other Sanitary Authorities, it appears necessary to exercise complete control over any particular class of imported food. All imports of such foods can be detained within the district of the Authority for examination by their Inspectors. Such action is from time to time taken, but in order to avoid complete dislocation of the trade concerned it is usual to allow consignments to leave the Docks on the understanding that they will be held for examination by the Medical Officers of Health of the districts of destination, who must have previously expressed their willingness to receive and take responsibility for the inspection of the goods. This was the principle put into practice in regard to imported Mutton and Lamb during the latter part of 1928, and was continued until June, 1929, VII.—FOOD INSPECTION. 46 when the improvement resulting from the institution of examination in the countries of origin was so marked as to make it possible to reduce the routine examination to ten per cent., and later to five per cent. Importers realise that it is in their interests to attain a high standard of examination at the source, and, in addition, to have goods so prepared and packed as to facilitate examination here. Thus, Ox Tongues arrive dressed so as to have the lymphatic glands easily accessible. Pig carcases have the submaxillary glands incised and drawn forward in an exposed position, so that no difficulty is experienced in examining the carcases in the frozen state. Imported Offal is packed with a view to rapid inspection, as is also boneless Veal, in which care is taken to expose the serous membranes. As regards Canned Goods, a considerable proportion is submitted for examination by expert examiners, on behalf of the merchants. From experience, the Port Sanitary Authority have complete confidence in this examination, which is of great assistance to their Inspectors. When diseased or unsound food is discovered it is almost invariably voluntarily surrendered, and very rarely is it necessary for the Port Sanitary Authority to go through the formal procedure of seizure and condemnation by a Magistrate. The majority of Foodstuffs condemned as unfit for human consumption is not destroyed, but is used for some industrial purpose, such as the manufacture of poultry food, soap, grease, &c. In every case the Port Sanitary Authority obtain guarantees and require to be satisfied that there is no danger that such condemned food, when it leaves their district, will be sold elsewhere for human food. Thus it comes about that, though such vast quantities of food are imported, and the number of Inspectors is few, the amount of food which goes into consumption in an unsatisfactory condition is infinitesimal. The Public Health (Imported Food) Amendment Regulations came into force on the 1st September, 1933. On 21st July the following explanatory Memorandum was circulated to the Meat Importers:— "Dear Sirs, "PUBLIC HEALTH (IMPORTED FOOD) AMENDMENT REGULATIONS, 1933. "The above came into operation on 1st September, 1933, They extend the classes of Prohibited and Conditionally Admissible meat as defined in the principal Regulations, viz., the Public Health (Imported Food) Regulations, 1925. "The first thing to note is that whereas the principal regulations defined the terms cattle and pig separately, the term animal is now used and includes a bull, cow, ox, heifer, calf, ram, ewe, wether, lamb, goat, kid, boar, sow and hog. "The importation of the following classes of meat is Prohibited "(a) Scrap meat, that is to say, meat which consists of scraps, trimmings or other pieces (whether with or without bone) of such shape or in such condition as to afford insufficient means of identification with a definite part of the carcase. But sausages and other prepared or manufactured articles of food (i.e., canned meat, potted meat, &c.) are not prohibited. "(b) Meat comprising the ribs or the abdominal wall from which the pleura or the peritoneum has been detached. "(c) The carcase of an animal with the head in its natural state of attachment in which any of the principal lymphatic glands are missing from their natural position. "(d) Part of the carcase of an animal from which any of the principal lymphatic glands which should normally be present in such part have been removed. "(e) The head or tongue without the submaxillary gland. "Briefly, then, scrap meat; stripped meat; meat from which lymphatic glands which ought to be there and available for inspection have been removed, or meat so cut as to avoid the inclusion of the principal lymphatic glands belonging to the parts are prohibited. "The following classes of meat are Conditionally admissible, that is to say, they must have the approved certificate, label or stamp affixed by a competent authority in the country of origin:— "(a) Any meat which is less than the complete carcase plus the head with all the principal lymphatic glands in their natural position. "This means that practically all imported meat will be required to have an official certificate. There are a certain number of pigs which come in as a complete carcase with the head attached, and these will not be required to have a certificate. 47 "(b) Lard, dripping, edible tallow and all other rendered animal fats must have a certificate, but oleo oil, oleo stearine and premier jus are specially exempted, and will be admissible without a certificate. "(c) All other edible parts of an animal, i.e., offal, tongues, &c.,must have an official certificate. But sausage casings are admissible without a certificate, also sausages and other prepared or manufactured articles of food, i.e., canned meat, potted meat, &c., are admissible without a certificate. "Briefly, anything less than the entire carcase of an animal must have an official certificate. The only exceptions are bacon and ham, sausage casings, sausages, potted and canned meats and things of that kind, and three special classes of edible tallow. "I think you may take it that the intention of the legislation is this : If there are any grounds for assuming that any meat is derived from diseased animals or is, at least, of very inferior quality, its importation is prohibited. If pleura or peritoneum is stripped or glands are removed it is presumed that this is done to conceal disease, and meat which is in the form of scraps may be presumed to be of very inferior quality, even if it is not from diseased animals. "If there is no reason to doubt the quality or soundness of meat but the whole carcase is not available for inspection in this country, it is admissible provided it has attached an approved certificate of inspection by a recognised authority in the country of origin. If the whole carcase and head and lymphatic glands are available for inspection here, it is possible for us to form a reasonably accurate opinion as to the condition of the animal prior to slaughter, and therefore we do not need a certificate from abroad. "There are certain exceptions to these general principles, such as bacon, ham, sausage meat, &c., for which I am not in a position to give any reason. "It should be understood that an official certificate does not exempt meat from such inspection as is possible in this country. "Yours faithfully." Efficient meat inspection necessitates both ante- and post-mortem inspection of the animal at the time of slaughter, and it is further essential that the internal organs should be examined in relation to the carcase from which they are derived. It is obvious, therefore, that the scope of the Inspector of imported meat is very limited in that he has no knowledge of the condition of the animal prior to slaughter and no internal organs are available for his examination. We are therefore obliged to rely almost entirely on the "official certificate" from the country of origin, but if it is desirable that this certificate should, from time to time, be checked, there are practically only two tissues, the condition of which is any guide to our Inspectors, namely, lymphatic glands and serous membranes. Taking this fact into consideration, the Association of Port Sanitary Authorities of the British Isles at their Meeting in November made certain recommendations designed to facilitate the inspection of imported cuts of meat. These have been very largely accepted and acted upon by the Meat Importers. In December I was asked to read a Paper on the "Inspection of Refrigerated Foods" before a joint Meeting of the British Association of Refrigeration and the Society of Chemical Industry (Food Group). The Paper was as follows:— "THE INSPECTION OF BEFBIGERATED FOODS.* "When I was invited to read a Paper on the Inspection of Befrigerated Foods I declined the honour because I did not think that I could do justice to the subject before a joint Meeting of the British Association of Befrigeration and the Food Group of the Society of Chemical Industry. I explained that as a Medical Officer of Health I was concerned with the fitness of food for human consumption, but that no doubt my audience would wish to go further and consider those finer points of appearance, flavour, &c., of refrigerated foods which make a great difference in their appeal to the public, but in regard to which I regret to say I have no special knowledge. However, I was not allowed to decline the invitation, and I can only hope that, though I cannot make any original contribution to this discussion, I may succeed in interesting you in the point of view of a Port Medical Officer of Health. "I would first of all like to say that though I have disclaimed any special knowledge regarding the finer points of appearance, flavour, &c., of refrigerated foods, that does not mean that I regard such considerations as of no public health significance. Food may be most attractive in appearance and yet be unwholesome or innutritious, on the other hand it may look unattractive and yet be quite satisfactory from a dietetic point of view; but it is, of course, well known that the flow of digestive juices is stimulated by the smell, sight, taste, or even by the thought of an attractive meal, and therefore it is highly desirable that food should not only be wholesome and nutritious, but that it should be presented in an attractive form to the consumer. The Medical Officer of Health will therefore welcome every endeavour to market food in such a way that it makes an appeal to the senses, provided that any method of treatment to which the food is subjected does not involve the addition of any harmful substance, any detraction from its nutritive value, nor, if it is an essential article of diet, any increase in price which will put it beyond the purchasing power of the poorer section of the community. * Reproduced by courtesy of the British Association of Refrigeration. 48 "It is impossible to exaggerate the importance of adequate nutrition in the maintenance of health. By adequate nutrition I mean the provision of a diet which is not only sufficient in quantity, but which, at the same time, contains in an assimilable form all the substances necessary for the proper functioning of every organ and tissue of the body. The science of dietetics is much more complex than it used to be when we calculated food values in calories alone. It appears that our diet must contain a variety of foods unless we are to supplement it with the synthetic concentrates which enterprising chemists have now placed at our disposal. "But nature provides all that is necessary: the problem is to carry food from the agricultural to the industrial areas; to preserve it so that there shall be no seasonal scarcity of essentials and to retain all its nutritive qualities. I think that refrigeration has solved this problem; for nothing is added to the food, nothing is taken away from it, and its nutritive value is unimpaired. "The men who have thus made more and better food available for the people of this country have played a more prominent part in the improvement of the public health than is generally recognised. We hear a great deal of what has been achieved by sanitation, improved housing, tuberculosis schemes, the medical inspection of school children, maternity and child welfare work and the National Health Insurance Act, but unless the people are properly fed all this is as the sounding brass and the tinkling cymbal. The two things of primary importance to life are good food and good water, a fact which is such a commonplace that we are apt to forget it in our enthusiasm for social improvements in other directions. We should take care not to divert into other channels money which ought to be spent on food, and I think we should endeavour to keep constantly before the public the fact that at all ages adequate nutrition is the first essential to health, and to educate the people in the choice and preparation of food according to their means. Being well fed does not mean merely that hunger is appeased or that the palate is pleasurably tickled, but that the needs of the body are fully supplied. The efficiency of a diet is therefore not to be measured by either the sense of repletion of the stomach or depletion of the pocket which it engenders. "We approach the inspection of refrigerated foods first of all with appreciation of the fact that in an industrial country such as this it is refrigeration which has brought an adequate diet within reach of every section of the community at all seasons of the year, and secondly with the feeling that refrigeration is the ideal method of preservation of perishable foods because, as I have already said, it adds nothing, takes nothing away and does not impair their nutritive value. Consequently we ought not to impose standards which would react to the disadvantage of refrigeration as compared to other methods of preservation, or which would tend to make refrigerated foods more expensive. Although, as I shall explain later, the scope of inspection of imported foods is very limited it is less so in refrigerated products which arrive practically in their natural state than in goods preserved by canning, drying, pickling or salting, &c. There is perhaps a tendency, therefore, for legislation to be more specific in regard to refrigerated foods than in regard to other imported foods. Thus it is at the present moment possible to import into this country either in a can or salted, meat which would not be admitted if preserved by refrigeration alone. I would not suggest that our standards in regard to refrigerated foods should be lowered, but I would suggest that we should be at least as exacting in regard to foods preserved by any other means. "The law empowers a Medical Officer of Health to seize any food which is diseased or unsound or unwholesome or unfit for the food of man. Where disease or unsoundness is found, the course of action is clear and there is no difficulty; indeed, the Medical Officer of Health has no need to seize the goods, they are almost always voluntarily surrendered. But on the question of unwholesomeness there is scope for argument . We may not be able to prove that any disturbance of health will result from the consumption of food which we have classed as unwholesome. However, so long as food is plentiful and cheap in relation to the purchasing power of the people we should give the benefit of any doubt to the consumer. Then there is the aesthetic point of view. We may not be able to point to any risk to health, but we may be able to say that it is objectionable to contemplate the consumption of food from a certain source, or which has been exposed to certain contamination. Again, in time of plenty we should adopt a very broad interpretation of the term unwholesome. But if essential articles of food were scarce or dear it would be folly to exchange the remote possibility of some minor disturbance of health amongst susceptible individuals for the certainty of widespread malnutrition. Thus because refrigeration has increased enormously the available food supply, and because its technique has developed to such a pitch of perfection, we are able to demand higher standards in regard to food hygiene than were practicable formerly. No doubt you will make still further progress, and we shall follow when we can safely do so, always keeping in mind that nutrition is the basis of health, and that we must not be responsible for making it difficult for any section of the community to obtain an ample supply of the essential foods. "Legislation in regard to food inspection has therefore been adapted to the progress in the development of the food industry. The first regulations dealing specifically with imported food were the Public Health (Unsound Food) Regulations, 1908, and the Public Health (Foreign Meat) Regulations, 1908, and Amendment Regulations, 1909. These were replaced by the Public Health (Imported Food) Regulations, 1925, which have recently been amended by the Public Health (Imported Food) Amendment Regulations, 1933. No doubt there will be further amendments in due course. "Though these Regulations refer to imported food in general, meat receives special attention. Efficient meat inspection involves ante- and post-mortem examination at the time of slaughter of the animals from which the meat is derived, for there are diseases which, though obvious in the live animal, are difficult to detect post-mortem and conversely disease may be detected post-mortem which could not be diagnosed, or even suspected, ante-mortem. Evidence of disease is most likely to be found in the internal organs, the lymphatic glands and the serous membranes, and the Inspector in the abbatoir or slaughterhouse will insist on seeing the internal organs and the carcase at the same time, and he will not allow serous membranes or lymphatic glands to be removed. It is at once apparent how limited is the scope of the Meat Inspector at the port of discharge of refrigerated meat. He has no knowledge of the condition of the animals prior to slaughter, no internal organs are available for his inspection; he has only lymph glands and serous membranes to guide him, and in some cuts of meat not even these. Moreover, the meat is covered in 49 wrappings or is contained in boxes or bags and is being discharged as fast as the facilities of the port permit, while railway trucks and road vans are waiting to convey it to cold stores, markets or retail shops. The policy in legislation regarding imported meat has therefore been first to prohibit absolutely certain classes of meat such as scrap meat which, even if it is not derived from diseased animals is at least of very poor quality, and meat from which serous membrane or lymphatic glands have been removed, the assumption being that the object of such removal is to conceal disease; secondly to require evidence that the animals from which the meat has been derived were examined ante-mortem and post-mortem by a competent authority in the country of origin and were found to be free, from disease. Practically all imported meat is now required to be accompanied by an official certificate which is defined as ' a certificate, label, mark, stamp or other voucher which is affixed to oversea meat or to a package containing such meat by a competent authority in the country of origin and is for the time being recognised by the Minister as evidence that the meat to which it relates has been derived from an animal which was free from disease at the time of slaughter and has been dressed or prepared and packed with all necessary precautions for the prevention of danger to public health.' "Though we are obliged to trust very largely to inspection in the country of origin, we are empowered to examine any meat on its arrival in this country whether it is officially certificated or not. In the ordinary way we are content to carry out such sampling as is possible without causing serious dislocation of the work on the docks; in London we are in close touch with Smithfield Market, where the opportunities for inspection are greater than in the port, and the Sanitary Authorities of inland districts inform us if unsatisfactory conditions in imported food come under their notice. From time to time conditions have been discovered which have necessitated much more thorough examination of certain imports, e.g., some years ago Australian beef was subject to full inspection for the nodules in the brisket and the region of the stifle joint due to the worm, Onchocerca gibsoni, and, more recently, every carcase of imported mutton was inspected for evidence of caseous lymphadenitis. Frozen ox-tongues are always carefully watched for signs of actinobacillosis in the submaxillary glands and the proportion of tongues examined is adjusted from time to time according to the results of our inspection. Such rigorous measures on our part, however, are not usually necessary for long. The particular problem is energetically tackled in the exporting countries, and we are able to reduce our inspection to such sampling as is necessary to assure us that a high standard of examination is being maintained abroad. "There are no regulations prescribing the method of packing of refrigerated meat, but it is clear that it is in the interests of merchants to arrange that such imports as offal, boneless meat, &c., shall be so packed that inspection is possible without previous thawing of the goods. If boneless beef, kidneys, livers, &c., are frozen in a solid mass, it is quite impossible to carry out any inspection at all until the mass has been throughly thawed out and separated into its component parts. This, of course, leads not only to delay, but to deterioration of the meat. Again, where the Inspector will require to see serous membranes or particular lymphatic glands, these should be made easily accessible. "A number of recommendations have from time to time been made for the guidance of merchants; for example, it is recommended that internal organs should be frozen separately, and be packed in layers not more than two organs deep, so that at least one side of each organ is open to inspection without unpacking; that the submaxillary glands of ox-tongues, and also in pigs, should be exposed to view on each side; that pieces of boneless beef should be frozen separately before being bagged and that boneless veal should be folded so that the pleura is exposed on one side and the peritoneum on the other. "Official certificates too must be so placed that while they are protected from defacement or detachment during transport they are readily accessible to the Food Inspector. "The organisation and inspection in the abattoirs in the exporting countries is now so good that we find very little disease in imported meat. The work of the Meat Inspector in ports is therefore principally concerned with conditions which arise subsequent to the slaughter of the animals and the dressing of the carcases, viz., brine staining, mould growths and decomposition. The most common of these conditions in our experience is brine staining. Meat so affected is uneatable, and we therefore require it to be reconditioned. This can be done by trimming when there is a good thickness of meat as on the legs and back of a carcase of mutton. But where the interior of the thoracic or abdominal cavities is affected it is obvious that efficient trimming is not practicable, and the affected parts must be condemned. Mould growths do not make meat unfit for human food, but unless evidence of moulds is removed the meat is not marketable. The most favourable conditions for the growth of moulds are a humid atmosphere and a temperature near to freezing point. At lower temperatures moulds will survive and grow to some extent, but not rapidly. Profuse growths of white moulds is evidence that at some stage of storage the temperature has been in the neighbourhood of freezing point. White moulds can be wiped off, but black spot, which can grow at a temperature as low as 18° F., requires trimming. At the present time there are arriving in this country experimental shipments from Australia of chilled beef carried in an atmosphere containing about ten per cent. of carbonic acid gas. This concentration of CO2 is sufficient to inhibit mould growths, and the condition of recent consignments has been most encouraging. At the same time it appears that it is of the greatest importance to avoid exposure of the meat to the spores of moulds before it is put on board ship. Nothing can compensate for careless handling before shipment. Further, the greatest care is necessary in the hanging of the meat in the chambers so that the cold air and CO2 gas circulate freely round every part. I feel sure that with attention to detail in every stage from the abattoir to discharge from ship it will be possible to land large quantities of chilled Australian beef in this country in excellent condition. ''Extensive decomposition of meat cargoes is now seldom seen, thanks to the perfection of refrigeration machinery. Small quantities of meat which are soft and decomposed because of faulty stowage do frequently come under the notice of Inspectors and are condemned. Bone-taint, which is a particular type of decomposition, is now seldom met with, in the ports at least. I understand that the cause and prevention of this condition are now well known. 50 "Occasionally frozen meat has been contaminated by the fumes from oil fuel. The taint is, of course' most noticeable in the fat, but tends gradually to disappear in store, particularly if the coverings of the meat are removed. It has been the practice to detain such tainted meat in store till no smell can be detected when the fat is rubbed in the warm hand, or when fat portions of the meat are cooked by boiling. A few carcases of mutton damaged by fuel oil or stained by charcoal insulation have come under notice, and, of course, accidents to ships such as fire, collision, sea damage, &c., may result in the condemnation of large quantities of refrigerated foods. "Dairy produce of all kinds arrive in excellent condition. From time to time samples are taken for analysis, but rather as to quality and purity than as to any change due to cold storage. The bad egg, of course, speaks for itself, and no useful purpose would be served by the Port Sanitary Authority attempting to carry out any extensive examination of imported eggs. Similarly, unsound fruit is not marketable, and the Port Sanitary Authority are principally concerned to get it removed quickly from the docks. The condition of Brown Heart' in apples is, however, one in which Port Sanitary Authorities do take special interest, because externally the fruit looks quite sound, and therefore if it got into the hands of unscrupulous dealers it might be sold to the prejudice of the public. "I may briefly summarise the position as regards the inspection of refrigerated foods as follows:— "It is neither practicable nor necessary to carry out extensive inspection as a routine procedure in the ports, but we have ample powers and, if there is any indication either from our own observations or from information received from inland districts that close control of any particular class of food, or food from any particular source is necessary, we can detain whole consignments of such food and subject them to the most complete examination before we release any part of them. It is, however, very seldom necessary to take such drastic steps, for the best food in the world comes to the English market in the best possible condition and if, from time to time something goes wrong, or some new standard is imposed, the merchants themselves apply the remedy or adjust their organisation overseas as quickly as possible, and we are soon justified in relaxing our hold. "In conclusion, I should like to say that those of us who are brought into close touch with the refrigeration of food without understanding the engineering details are astounded at the progress that has been made in recent years, and at the accuracy with which temperatures and humidity can be controlled. I have spoken only in regard to food arriving in ships, but refrigeration is being employed to an increasing extent in restaurants, shops and private houses. I am sure such extension of the use of this ideal method of preserving food will be welcomed and encouraged by everybody concerned for the health and well-being of the people of this country." CHILLED BEEF FROM AUSTRALIA. The storage-life of chilled meat is limited by the growth of moulds and bacteria and by the development of taint in the fat. Researches of the Food Investigation Board have shown that carbonic acid gas inhibits the growth of micro-organisms and delays the appearance of rancidity. A concentration of 10 per cent. of CO2 will about double the life of chilled beef. Recently several small consignments of chilled beef have arrived in the Port of London from Australia. In some cases CO2 has not been employed, in others an endeavour has been made to maintain a concentration of 10 per cent. of carbondioxide in the chambers, but it has been found that leakage of gas has been very great. Nevertheless, the results of the experiments are encouraging, and no doubt efforts will be made to render storage chambers more nearly gas-tight. It is, however, apparent that a great deal depends on the care taken in the handling and transport of the meat before shipment and that conditions on board ship cannot compensate for the previous exposure of the meat to infection by moulds and bacteria and to changing temperatures. THE PORT OF LONDON (ASSIGNMENT OF POWERS) ORDER, 1983. In November, 1932, the Port Sanitary Authority made application to the Minister of Health for an Order in accordance with Section 112 of the Public Health (London) Act, 1891, assigning to them the powers, rights, duties, capacities, liabilities or obligations of a Sanitary Authority under Part II. of the London County Council (General Powers) Act, 1932. The Order was duly made by the Minister and came into operation on 1st September, 1933. Part II. of the above Act deals with Public Health matters, including the compulsory registration of premises for the sale or manufacture of ice cream and preserved foods, the making of bye-laws for promoting sanitary and cleanly conditions in the manufacture, preparation, storage, transport or exposure for sale of any article intended to be sold for food and for the notification of cases or suspected cases of food poisoning. 51 Caseous Lymphadenitis.—During the year the proportion of carcases of mported mutton examined for Caseous Lymphadenitis, irrespective of the country of origin, remained at 5 per cent., and that for pieces of mutton at 100 per cent. The results of the examination during the year of mutton and lamb, weight 43 lbs. and over, from Australia, New Zealand and South America were as follows:— Where from. Carcases examined. Carcases found to be diseased. Carcases found to have Lymphatic Glands missing. Australia 9,189 1 Nil. New Zealand 13,135 3 Nil. South America 9,079 20 Nil. Totals 31,403 24 Nil. Percentage condemned. From Australia 0.01 New Zealand 0.02 „ South America 0.22 Pig Carcases.—A careful examination was made of a percentage of pig carcases arriving in the Port, the number of carcases examined being 2,871. Six carcases were found to be diseased. Actinobacillosis in Ox Tongues.—A percentage examination was made of every consignment of ox tongues arriving in the Port. 251 consignments were put in dock store, where careful examination was made by your Officers of 25,978 tongues, and 246 tongues were found affected with Actinobacillosis. (1) Action taken under the Public Health (Imported Food) Regulations, 1925, resulted in 1,303 tons 17 cwts. 2 qrs. 23 lbs. of unsound food being destroyed or disposed of for purposes other than human consumption. Disposal of Condemned Foods:— Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Boiling down (recovery of Fats, &c.) 58 5 0 20 Cattle and Poultry Foods 148 9 2 15 Refining 129 2 0 27 Experiment (Laboratory work) — 4 0 11 Exportation 6 10 2 23 Soap-making 10 10 0 21 Removed to other districts — 6 2 12 Reconditioning — 17 1 18 Distillation 13 1 2 21 Industrial — 7 0 18 Manure 362 0 0 0 Destroyed—Buried 368 16 2 11 „ —Burnt 205 6 0 22 Total weight 1,303 17 2 23 Foodstuffs Condemned:— Dock. Quantity. No. of seizures. Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Royal Albert Dock 81 14 0 7 300 Royal Victoria Dock 137 13 2 19 277 King George V. Dock 476 8 1 14 154 East India Dock 107 11 1 10 26 West India Dock 159 6 0 24 66 Millwall Dock 13 10 0 23 11 Surrey Commercial Dock 76 13 0 17 81 London Dock 98 18 2 2 285 St. Katharine Dock 37 8 2 17 69 Regent's Canal Dock 51 3 3 18 19 Tilbury Dock 63 9 2 12 71 Total weight 1,303 17 2 23 1,359 52 The approximate weight of goods condemned and the number of detentions and seizures made annually during the last ten years were as follows:— Year. Approximate weight. No. of seizures. Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. 1924 2,998 11 2 17 992 1925 1,423 11 0 19 1,196 1926 4,011 15 3 5 1,620 1927 1,813 14 2 4 1,369 1928 6,018 3 1 22 1,436 1929 1,743 5 3 19 1,569 1930 2.572 10 3 1 1,547 1931 1,408 8 1 17 1,375 1932 2,654 13 1 16 1,593 1933 1,303 17 2 23 1,359 The detention and control of Fats under the Public Health (Imported Food) Regulations, 1925, during the year was as follows:— No. of casks, &c., reported as imported into the district 22,802 No. of casks, &c., found to be officially certificated — No. of casks, &c., released to wharves under Notice of Exportation 13,773 No. of Exportation Notices served 319 No. of casks, &c., released for exportation 2,156+ No. of casks, &c., released for soapmaking, &c. 17,827 No. of casks, &c., in transit on through Bills of Lading — 2,444 barrels, &c., of whale oil arrived in the Port; this material was released. Foodstuffs disposed of as unfit for human consumption:— Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Mutton and Lamb—706 carcases, parts ex 1,177 carcases, 4 bags. 18 3 0 13 Beef—36 hinds, crops, &c., ex 252 hinds, crops, &c., 80 bags. 2 18 1 1 Tenderloins—1 bag and ex 2 bags 0 1 0 6 Pork—5 carcases and parts ex 75 1 6 0 12 Veal—19 quarters and parts ex 16, 2 bags 0 4 1 24 Hams—1 case — — 21 Bacon—2 sides and parts of 4 sides — 1 0 10 Rabbits—41 crates and parts ex 43 1 8 0 18 Sausage—7 cases — 9 1 9 Total weight 24 11 3 2 Meats (Tinned):— Tons cwts. qrs. lbs. Ox Tongues—4 tins — — — 11 Corned Beef—14 tins — — 3 0 Hams—4 tins, loose 2 — - 2 20 Chickens—11 tins, 6 Jars — — 2 16 Total weight — 2 0 19 Fats:— Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Tallow—389 packages 9 14 0 21 Offal:— Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Ox Tongues—Diseased 276, no glands 23, bags 21, and ex 6, loose 15 1 15 2 6 Ox Cheeks—4 bags — 2 2 20 „ Skirts—3 bags — 2 0 25 „ Livers—22 cases, 16 bags 1 2 0 3 „ Tails—6 bags, loose 2 - 4 0 3 „ Kidneys—5 bags, 3 cases — 2 1 11 Sheep Tongues—4 bags — 1 2 0 Carried forward 3 10 1 12 53 Offal—continued. Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Brought forward 3 10 1 12 Sheep Kidneys—32 cases — 2 1 10 „ Hearts—8 bags — 4 1 13 Calf Hearts—3 bags and ex 1 — 2 3 18 „ Tongues—2 bags — 1 2 22 Lamb Hearts—98 bags — 10 2 10 „ Tongues—11 bags — 2 3 4 Pig Heads—3 loose — — 1 5 „ Livers—1 box — — 3 1 Pancreas Glands—50 cases and part of 1 1 6 2 26 Total 6 3 3 9 Fish:— Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Anchovies—25 cases and 1 keg 1 7 2 13 Various—512 bags, 65 boxes 28 6 1 22 Oysters—4 boxes — 3 3 0 Mussels—1 box — — 3 0 Total 29 18 2 7 Fish (Tinned):— Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Lobster—96 tins — — 3 21 Sardines—12 cases, 1,328 tins — 19 3 22 Various—99 cases, 10,579 tins 7 9 2 15 Fish Paste—1 case — 1 1 14 Total 8 11 3 16 Fruit:— Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Currants—1 case — — 2 0 Raisins—22 boxes — 3 3 7 Sultanas—27 cases — 13 2 0 Apples—179 packages 3 19 0 8 Bananas—5,760 stems, bunches, &c. 145 16 0 11 Cherries—1 case — 1 2 21 Fresh Fruit—180 packages 6 5 1 24 Figs—9 boxes — 16 1 1 Grapes—15 cases, 8 boxes — 5 6 0 Oranges—1,690 boxes 66 9 3 22 Melons—40 cases 2 3 2 8 Pears—4,767 cases, boxes, &c. 119 4 2 15 Prunes—314 boxes 3 18 0 0 Tomatoes—40 crates, 110 bundles 3 18 3 11 Dates—607 cases 15 16 3 17 Lemons—172 cases, 39 packages 10 10 0 0 Mandarines—12 cases — 7 2 0 Total 380 11 1 5 Fruit (Tinned and Bottled):— Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Oranges—-4 cases, 9 tins — 2 2 24 Tomatoes—29 cases, 326 tins 1 4 0 13 Various—136 cases, 2,769 tins 4 18 1 22 Total 6 5 1 3 Fruit Pulp, &c.:— Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Tomato Puree—1 case, 93 tins — 7 1 20 „ Soup—448 tins — 4 0 6 „ Pulp—330 tins — 13 1 13 „ Ketchup—1 tin - - - 6 Raspberry Pulp—35 tins - 1 3 6 Apricot Pulp—14 cases, 36 tins - 19 3 17 Greengage Pulp—9 tins - — 3 15 Orange Pulp—5 barrels 2 4 2 0 Grape Fruit Pulp—1 barrel, 10 casks 2 8 0 23 Fruit Juice—3 barrels 1 7 0 0 Grape Fruit Juice—7 cases, 6 tins — 8 2 25 Total 8 15 3 19 54 Vegetables:— Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Onions—1,149 cases, bags, &c 54 12 0 3 Peas—24 bags, sacks, &c. 2 5 2 13 Various—10 cases, &c. — 3 2 0 Potatoes—1,482 packages 73 7 0 0 Total 130 8 0 16 Vegetables (Tinned):— Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Various—25 tins — — 1 20 Gherkins—2,270 tins 12 0 0 0 Cucumbers—118 cases, 19 tins 6 0 0 0 Total 18 0 1 20 Miscellaneous:— Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Soya Bean Meal 362 0 0 0 Molasses—3 sacks — 5 0 0 Dried Mint—87 bags 4 7 0 0 Total 366 12 0 0 Nuts:— Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Almonds—7 bags — 12 1 2 Groundnuts—loose collected — 14 0 0 Cocoanuts—9 bags 1 2 3 14 Desiccated Cocoanut—1 case 2 1 1 Various—loose collected — 2 2 10 Chestnuts—30 bags 1 9 1 4 Total 4 3 1 3 Provisions, &c.:— Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Sugar Sweepings—1,143 bags 110 4 3 20 Margarine—60 boxes — 5 1 4 Cheese—19 cases, cartons, &c. — 8 2 8 Chicory—35 bags 1 15 0 0 Tea Sweepings—loose collected — — — 12 Evaporated Milk—20 tins — — — 27 Condensed Milk—45 tins — — 1 8 Total 113 4 1 23 Grain and Flour:— Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Wheat 81 7 3 17 Barley — — 1 10 Flour—261 bags 16 0 3 14 Bice 32 4 1 20 Maize 6 2 0 18 Total 145 15 2 23 Confectionery:— Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Confectionery—93 boxes, cases, &c. 2 12 2 3 Marzipan—2 packages — — 2 24 Almond Icing—1 package — — 1 0 Total 2 13 1 27 Prepared Foods, &c.:— Tons. cwts qrs. lbs. Roiled Oats—247 bags 9 7 3 10 Tapioca—10 bags — 12 0 0 Macaroni—5 cases — 1 0 13 Yeast—ex 10 packages — — — 18 Total 10 1 0 13 Sundries:— Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Canned good 38 4 1 13 55 PUBLIC HEALTH (IMPORTED FOOD) REGULATIONS, 1925, AND PUBLIC HEALTH (IMPORTED FOOD) AMENDMENT REGULATIONS, 1983. Official Certificates from the following countries are recognised by the Ministry of Health, under the above Regulations:— (1) In respect of Items (a) and (c) of the Second Schedule of the Amendment Regulations, i.e.:— (a) A severed part of the carcase of an animal (including the head or any part thereof, and the whole carcase without the head, but not including any part of the carcase of a pig which has been salted, cured, pickled, dried and smoked, or otherwise prepared in the manner in which bacon or ham is ordinarily prepared) from which no submaxillary, pre-scapular, pre-crural, superficial inguinal, supramammary, or popliteal gland has been taken out; (c) All edible parts of an animal other than (i.) the head or other severed parts of the carcase, (ii.) the intestines prepared in the form of sausage casings and (iii.) meat which has before importation been made ready for human consumption in the form of a sausage or other prepared or manufactured article of food. Argentine Republic. United States of America. Australia. Uruguayan Republic. Brazil. Union of South Africa. Canada. Iceland. New Zealand. South West Africa. (2) In respect of Item (b) of the Second Schedule of the Amendment Regulations, i.e., lard, dripping, edible tallow and all other rendered animal fats, except oleo oil, oleo stearine and premier jus— Australia. Switzerland. Canada. United States of America. Denmark. Argentine Republic. Italy. Hong Kong. New Zealand. Uruguayan Republic. Netherlands. Brazilian Republic. Sweden. Hungary. In accordance with Article II. (4) of the above-mentioned Regulations, Notices were served for the exportation of the following material:— Description and Quantity of Meats and Fats. Where from. Number of Notices served. 13,636 casks, &c. New Zealand 248 3,911 „ Australia 54 319 „ South America 7 364 „ Other Countries 10 PUBLIC HEALTH (IMPORTED MILK) REGULATIONS, 1926. No importation of milk requiring action under these Regulations was reported during the year. PUBLIC HEALTH (PRESERVATIVES, &c., IN FOOD) REGULATIONS, 1925 TO 1927. For action under these Regulations, reference is directed to the list of foodstuffs submitted for analysis. FERTILISERS AND FEEDING STUFFS ACT, 1926. No samples were taken under this Act during the year. 56 (2) SHELLFISH. Public Health (Shellfish) Regulations, 1915, Orders of November, 1916. The Shellfish laying on the North side of the estuary of the Thames continued to be the subject of the Order issued by the Port of London Sanitary Authority in November, 1916, Until the above Regulations are amended by the Ministry of Health it will not be possible to modify this Order so as to provide for the sterilization of Mussels by steam as an alternative to relaying. No cases of illness were reported during the year as having been traced to the consumption of shellfish from the layings in the district of the Port of London Sanitary Authority. (3) SAMPLES OF FOOD EXAMINED DURING THE YEAR. (a) Bacteriologist— Date. 1933. Sample. Result of Analysis. Action taken. Mar. 7 Canned Pilchards The tins on opening contained no gas The fish were canned with oil and appeared in good condition. Consignment released. The odour was sweet. A. Cultural Experiments. The following cultures were made from the solid fish and the fluid of both samples. 1. Aerobic depth cultures on ordinary agar from 1/100 grm. of material. 2. Aerobic surface plate cultures on litmus lactose agar from 1/100 grm. of material. 3. Aerobic glucose broth cultures in decimal dilutions from 1/10 grm. downwards. 4. Anaerobic cultures in meat water from 1/10 grm. 5. Anaerobic cultures in milk 1/10 grm. No growth was obtained after 1 week's incubation at 37° C. B. Feeding Experiments. None carried out. Both samples are free from living bacteria. Sample No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Sept. 7 Water (6) Micro-organisms on Gelatin— 1. Good quality. 68° F.—3 days 18 110 20 30 32 234 2. Medium quality— passable. Micro-organisms on Agar— 98° F.—2 days 18 178 10 32 10 12 3. Good qualitv. Bacillus Coli Absent from 35 c.c. 4. Good quality . Coliform organisms 5. Good quality. None. 6. Fair quality. Other organisms No Gelatin Liquifiers. Sample No. 1 2 3 4 5 Oct. 5 Water (5) Micro-organisms on Gelatin— 68° F.—3 days 397 274 293 284 30 Samples No. 1, 2, 3 are of poor quality. Micro-organisms on Agar— 98° F.—1 day 28 70 25 37 3 Samples No. 4 and 5 are of good quality. Absent from 100 c.c. (2 days) Absent from 80 c.c. Bacillus Coli Present in every c.c. Present in 10 c.c. not in 1 c.c. Present in 10 c.c. not in 1 c.c. None. None. Coliform organisms Other organisms Bacillus Welchii Absent B. Welchii absent from80c.c. from 50 c.c. 57 Date. 1933. Sample. Result of Analysis. Action taken. Sample No. 1 2 3 4 5 Oct. 24 Water (5) Micro-organisms on Gelatin— Samples No. 1 to 4 are of good quality. Sample No. 5 is of very poor quality. 68°F.—3 days 10 26 56 46 182 Micro-organisms on Agar— 98°F.—2 days 8 10 30 12 218 Bacillus Coli Absent from 100 c.c. absent from 80 c.c. Coliform organisms None. B. Aerogenes type present in 10 c.c., not in 1 c.c. Other organisms Bacillus Welchii 100 c.c. absent from Nov. 6 Water Micro-organisms on Gelatin— Per c.c. No action necessary beyond recommendation as to care of hose. 68°F.—3 days 550 Micro-organisms on Agar— 98°F.—2 days 155 Bacillus Coli Absent from 80 c.c. Coliform organisms None. Other organisms Bacillus Welchii present in 100 c.c. Bacillus Welchii absent in 10 c.c. (b) Analyst— Jan. 18 Grape Fruit Pulp On analysis this sample showed the presence of sulphur dioxide to the extent of 2,400 parts per million. None. „ 18 Orange Pulp On analysis this sample showed the presence of sulphur dioxide to the extent of 2,860 parts per million. None. April 3 Grape Fruit Pulp This sample was found to be free from the presence of preservatives. Consignment released. „ 5 Rubbed Mint This sample was found to contain about 40 per cent of leaves foreign to genuine mint. These foreign leaves mostly had the characteristics of the Ailanthus leaf. Consignment re-exported. „ 13 Strawberry Pulp Sample contained sulphite preservative equivalent to 415 parts of sulphur dioxide per million. Consignment released. „ 13 Apple Marrow Pulp Sample contained sulphite preservative equivalent to 880 parts of sulphur dioxide per million. „ May 12 Sturgeon in Tomato Sample contained tin and tin compounds equivalent to 0.53 grain of tin per pound. „ „ 17 Yeast Free from the presence of arsenic „ „ 17 Yeast Sample contained arsenic to the extent of 0.014 grain per pound. „ „ 17 Yeast Sample contained arsenic to the extent of 0.007 grain per pound. „ „ 19 Crab Meat Sample contained tin and tin compounds equivalent to 0.1 grain of tin per pound. „ „ 19 Salmon Sample contained tin and tin compounds equivalent to 0.2 grain of tin per pound. „ June 14 Shelled Walnuts This sample was found to be free from the presence of sulphur dioxide. Consignment released. „ 15 9 tins Sardines These samples on analysis gave the following results:— Reported to Ministry of Sample No. Lead, parts per million. Health and Circular letter to Importers. 1 14 2 6 3 17 4 10 5 26 6 7 7 7 8 9 9 12 „ 29 Ice-powder This sample was found to contain a considerable number of dark particles, which on examination under the microscope proved to be finely ground vanilla bean. Consignment released. „ 30 Sardines Contained lead and lead compounds equivalent to 24 parts of lead per million. Reported to the Ministry of Health. 58 Date. 1933. Sample. Result of Analysis. Action taken. July 5 Salmon This sample was found to contain tin equivalent to 0.26 grains of tin per pound. Consignment released. „ 8 Tomato Puree This sample was found to contain tin equivalent to 0.64 grains of tin per pound. Consignment released. „ 11 Grape Fruit Pulp This sample was found to contain sulphite preservative equivalent to 2,020 parts of sulphur dioxide per million. Consignment re-exported. „ 14 Sardines (5) These samples on analysis gave the following results:— Reported to the Ministry of Health. Sample No. Lead, parts per million. 1 9 Reported to the Ministry of Health. 2 none 3 2 4 15 5 7 „ 18 Sardines (4) 1 6 2 10 3 11 4 6 „ 26 Chocolate Paste Found to be free from the presence of preservatives. Consignment released. Aug 24 Sardines (10) These samples on analysis gave the following results:— Reported to the Ministry of Health. Sample No. Lead, parts per million. 1 5 Reported to the Ministry of Health. 2 8 3 22 4 10 5 8 6 15 7 2 8 12 9 18 10 8 Sept. 5 & 13 Sardines (4) 1 50 2 35 3 30 4 30 „ 5 & 13 Sardines (4) The can in which these sardines were packed was found to contain lead and lead compounds equivalent to 660 parts of lead per million or 0.0145 grains of lead per square inch. Reported to the Ministry of Health. The oil was also found to contain lead and lead compounds equivalent to 11 parts of lead per million. „ 14 Water (2). These samples on analvsis save the following results:— (1) 2 Grains per Gallon. Ammonia, Free and Saline 0.0002 0.0002 „ Albuminoid 0.0021 0.0035 Oxygen absorbed, in 15 minutes 0.0185 0.0228 „ „ „ 4 hours 0.0357 0.0386 Nitrogen, Nitrous None. None. „ Nitric 0.12 0.13 Chlorine 5.20 4.70 „ as Sodium Chloride 8.58 7.76 Total solid matter dried at 100° c. 35.35 34.30 Appearance in 2 ft. tube Colourless and clear. Very pale yellow and clear. Metals (Copper, Lead, Iron, Zinc) race of Iron. Trace of Iron. B. Coli Communis, Presumptive Test:— 100 c.c. Negative. Negative. 10 c.c. Negative. Negative. 1 c.c. Negative. Negative. This water, in its present condition, is suitable for all dietetic purposes. „ 28 Oysters in tins this sample was found to be free from preservatives. Consignment released. Oct. 6 Sardines Contained lead and lead compounds equivalent to 7 parts of lead per million. The can was found to contain 16 parts of lead per million. Reported to the Ministry of Health. „ 6 Sardines Contained lead and lead compounds equivalent to 13 parts of lead per million. The can was found to contain 64 parts of lead per million. Reported to the Ministry of Health. 59 Date. 1933. Sample. Result of Analysis. Action taken. Oct. 6 Norwegian Silts Free from lead Reported to the Ministry of Health. „ 18 Marjoram Found to contain not more than 1 per cent. of leaves foreign to those of genuine marjoram. Consignment released. „ 25 Raisins Contained sulphite preservative equivalent to 736 parts of sulphur dioxide per million. Consignment released. „ 25 Sultanas Contained sulphite preservative equivalent to 810 parts of sulphur dioxide per million. Reported to the Ministry of Health, and Importers warned. „ 27 Water (3) These samples on analysis gave the following results:— (1) (2) (3) Ammonia, Free and Saline 0.0021 0.0007 0.0007 „ Albuminoid 0.0042 0.0042 0.0050 Oxygen absorbed, in 15 minutes 0.0120 0.0150 0.0090 „ „ „ 4 hours 0.0329 0.0419 0.0389 Nitrogen, Nitrous None. None. None. „ Nitric 0.10 0.08 0.10 Chlorine 3.90 4.00 3.90 „ as Sodium Chloride 6.44 6.60 6.44 Total solid matter dried at 100° c. 31.85 32.20 31.85 Hardness, Temporary 16.01 16.19 16.10 „ Permanent 4.03 4.03 4.03 Appearance in 2 ft. tube Very pale yellow and clear. Very pale yellow and clear. Very pale yellow and clear. Metals (Copper, Lead, Iron, Zinc) Trace of Iron. Trace of Iron. Trace of Iron. B. Coli Communis, Presumptive Test:— 100 c.c. Negative. Negative. Negative. 10 c.c. Negative. Negative. Negative. 1 c.c. Negative. Negative. Negative. This water, in its present condition, is suitable for all dietetic purposes. „ 30 Sultanas (4) Contained sulphite preservative equivalent to 520, 240, 550 and 210 parts of sulphur dioxide per million respectively. Consignment released. Nov. 6 Orange Juice The sample contained sulphite preservative equivalent to 750 parts of sulphur dioxide per million. Alcohol was also present. A microscopical examination revealed the presence of a large number of yeast cells. Consignment destroyed. „ 6 Walnuts Absence of sulphur dioxide from both shells and nuts. None. „ 8 Raisins The sample contained sulphite preservative equivalent to 770 parts of sulphur dioxide per million. None. „ 16 Raisins The sample contained sulphite preservative equivalent to 285 parts per million. None. „ 16 Raisins The sample contained sulphite preservative equivalent to 740 parts per million. None. „ 16 Raisins The sample contained sulphite preservative equivalent to 1,140 parts per million. Merchants informed, withdrawn from sale. „ 17 Sardines The sample was found to contain lead and lead compounds equivalent to 3.5 parts of lead per million, and tin and tin compounds equivalent to 0.75 grains of tin per pound. None. „ 17 Canned Peas (3 samples) Free from the presence of poisonous metals other than traces only of tin. Consignment released. „ 18 Sultanas Sulphite preservatives equivalent to 230 parts of sulphur dioxide per million. None. „ 21 Sardines (2) These samples on examination were found to contain lead and lead compounds equivalent to 11 and 12 parts respectively of lead per million. None. „ 22 Sardines (5) These samples on analysis gave the following results:— Sample No. Lead, parts per million. 1 23 Further investigation of formalsample. 2 9 None. 3 16 None. 4 18 None. 5 3 None. 60 Date. 1933. Sample. Result of Analysis. Action taken. Nov. 22 Crushed Linseed Cake Careful examination failed to reveal the presence of Castor Seed Husk. Further investigation of formal sample. „ 23 Tomato Puree Free from the presence of preservatives and prohibited colouring matter. None. „ 29 Sardines (6) These samples on analysis gave the following results:— Consignment re-exported. Sample No. Lead, parts per million. 1 16 2 14 3 20 4 23 5 18 6 25 „ 29 Sultanas Sulphite preservative equivalent to 185 parts of sulphur dioxide per million. None. Dec. 4 Raisins (2) These samples on examination were found to contain sulphite preservative equivalent to 560 and 775 parts of sulphur dioxide per million. Released for ship's stores. „ 9 Raisins (6) These samples on analysis gave the following results:— None. Sample No. Parts of Sulphur Dioxide per million. 1 625 2 635 3 690 4 560 5 525 6 570 „ 12 Jelly Powder "Stlt Gele" The sample was found to be free from preservatives but contained lead and lead compounds equivalent to 26 parts of lead per million. The colouring was due to a dye of vegetable origin, somewhat characteristic of the Lichen class. Reported to the Ministry of Health and to the Medical Officer of Health of Southwark. „ 14 Raisins (6) These samples on analysis gave the following results:— None. Sample No. Parts of Sulphur Dioxide per million. 1 650 2 620 3 470 4 660 5 540 6 575 „ 14 Sardines* This sample on examination was found to contain lead and lead compounds equivalent to 21 parts of lead per million. Consignment detained for further sampling. „ 19 Liquid Yeast This sample on examination was found to contain the following:— None. Water 35.31% Nitrogen 0.07% Nitrogen equal to Albuminoids 0.37% Mineral Matter 0.81% Sugar solution was rapidly inverted at 20°C., showing the presence of considerable quantities of invertase. Traces of alcohol were also detected after treating 5% sugar solution with the sample for four days at 20.25°C. No arsenic was detected. „ 20 Sardines (6)* These samples on analysis gave the following results:— None. Sample No. Lead, parts per million. 1 15 2 13 3 12 4 13 5 13 6 8 „ 21 Sardines (2) 1 16 None. 2 18 61 Date. 1933. Sample. Result of Analysis. Action taken. Dec. 21 Sardines† This sample contained lead and lead compounds equivalent to 36 parts of lead per million. Consignment detained for further sampling. „ 23 Crab paste The sample was found to be free from the presence of preservatives and to contain traces only of tin, whilst the lead and lead compounds therein were equivalent to 3 parts of lead per million. None. „ 28 Sardines (6)† These samples on analysis gave the following results:— Consignment re-exported. Sample No. Lead, parts per million. 1 46 2 28 3 26 4 23 5 21 6 22 „ 30 Glucose (solid) This sample on examination was found to contain sulphite preservative equivalent to 320 parts of sulphur dioxide per million. Free from arsenic. Reported to the Ministry of Health. „ 30 Apples This sample on examination was found to be free from the presence of arsenic. None. „ 30 Sardines ... Contained lead and lead compounds equivalent to 14 parts of lead per million. None. ALIENS ORDER, 1920. Medical Inspection of Aliens. During the year 19,084 Aliens (excluding Alien Seamen) and 2,237 Transmigrants landed in the Port of London. Medical Certificates under the Aliens Order were issued in respect of 22 Aliens as follows:— Lunatic, Idiot or Mentally Deficient 15 Undesirable for Medical reasons 4 Physically incapacitated 2 Suffering from Acute Infectious Disease 1 Total 22 DANGEROUS DRUGS. On the 4th October your Medical Officer certified that the Master of the s.v. "Passat" was authorised to purchase and be in possession of 1 oz. of 2 per cent. cocaine eye drops and 4 ozs. of tincture of opium B.P. for the use of the ship until it reached its home port. The Certificate was issued under the Dangerous Drugs (No. 3) Regulations, 1923, amending the Dangerous Drugs Regulations, 1921, Regulation 15 of which is as follows:— "If a foreign ship in any port in Great Britain requires to obtain a supply of any of the drugs in order to complete the necessary equipment of the ship, the Master of the ship is authorised to purchase and be in possession of such quantity of any of the drugs as may be certified by the Medical Officer of Health of the Port where the ship is (or in his absence by the Assistant Medical Officer of Health of the Port) to be necessary for the purpose, the quantity not to exceed what is required for the use of the ship until it next reaches its home port. The certificate given by the Medical Officer or Assistant Medical Officer of Health of the Port shall be marked by the supplier with the date of the supply, and shall be retained by him and kept available for inspection." 62 HOUSEBOATS. There are, in the Port Sanitary district, some 330 floating dwellings; termed Houseboats, for lack of a better name. Some of these are large, well constructed and thoroughly sanitary, but many consist of small boats on which a roughly constructed deck house has been erected. The numbers of the latter type have increased so rapidly in recent years that the Port Sanitary Authority sought powers to exercise more control over them. During the year the City of London (Various Powers) Act received the Boyal Assent. Clauses 6 and 7 of this Act are as follows:— 6.—(1) Subject to the provisions of the section of this Act of which the marginal note is "For protection of Port Authority," the Corporation may from time to time make bye-laws with regard to houseboats as defined by sub-section (2) of this section for all or any of the following purposes (namely):— (a) for requiring the registration of houseboats and the issue of certificates by the Corporation of such registration upon such conditions as may be specified in the bye-laws; for prescribing the charges (not exceeding ten shillings for each certificate) to be paid in respect of certificates of registration and the period for which and the conditions upon which any such certificate shall remain in force; and for prohibiting the use of houseboats which are required to be registered unless the same be so registered : Provided that no houseboat shall be registered which does not comply with the bye-laws made under paragraph (f) of this sub-section; (b) for regulating the making of applications for the registration of houseboats and the procedure with regard thereto; (c) for requiring notice to be given to the Corporation of the transfer or sale or change of tenancy of registered houseboats; (d) for prohibiting the mooring of houseboats except at places specified in the bye-laws and for prescribing the maximum number in any situation. Provided that no bye-law under this paragraph affecting the Port of London shall be submitted for confirmation until it has been approved by the Port Authority and nothing in any bye-law under this paragraph shall be deemed to permit the mooring of any houseboat in a position contrary to any bye-law of any local authority or contrary to any direction of any harbour-master under section 267 (Power of harbour-masters) of the Port of London (Consolidation) Act 1920 or to make lawful the mooring of any houseboat in any place in which but for such bye-law the mooring of such houseboat would be unlawful; (e) for prescribing the maximum number of occupants of any houseboat in relation to the cubic air-space of the living and sleeping rooms therein; (/) for requiring the provision in houseboats of adequate means for the admission of daylight and of permanent ventilation and the provision of such sanitary conveniences and appliances as the bye-laws may require; (g) for promoting cleanliness in and the habitable condition of houseboats; (h) for preventing the spread of infectious disease by the persons inhabiting houseboats; (i) generally for the prevention of nuisances in connection with houseboats; and (j) for authorising the inspection of registered houseboats by or on behalf of the Corporation. (2) In this section the expression "houseboat" means any vessel or boat lying in any river or water or on any foreshore within the district of the Port of London Sanitary Authority which is used or is capable of being used as a place of habitation whether such use be temporary intermittent or permanent or as a place for accommodating or receiving persons for purposes of shelter recreation entertainment or refreshment or as club premises or as offices but shall not include— (i) a vessel normally engaged in the transport of persons or goods; or (ii) any craft or boat which is required to be registered by the Port Authority under the Port of London Acts 1920 to 1932; or (iii) any lightship or watch barge; or (iv) any canal boat or other boat registered under the Canal Boats Acts 1877 and 1884. (3) Any such bye-laws to be made by the Corporation under this section shall be made in accordance with the provisions with respect to bye-laws contained in the Public Health (London) Act 1891. (4) Nothing in this section shall extend to take away lessen prejudice alter or affect any of the estates rights powers interests privileges franchises or authority of the Port Authority. (5) As from the date when bye-laws under paragraphs (g) (h) and (i) of sub-section (1) of this section come into operation so much of the London Port Sanitary Authority (Additional Powers) Order 1923 as applies sub-section (2) of Section 95 of the Public Health (London) Act 1891 shall be annulled and such annulment shall be deemed to be a repeal of an enactment for the purposes of the Interpretation Act 1889. For protection of Port Authority. 7.—(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act the power of making bye-laws for the purposes referred to in paragraphs (a) (b) and (c) of sub-section (1) of the section of this Act of which the marginal note is "Bye-laws with regard to houseboats "shall in relation to so much of the district of the Port of London Sanitary Authority as is within the Port of London be exercised by the Port Authority in lieu of the Corporation and for that purpose sub-section (1) (a) (b) and (c) of the said section shall be read and have effect as if the Port Authority were referred to therein in lieu of the Corporation. 68 (2) The provisions of sections 446 to 452 of the Port of London (Consolidation) Act 1920 shall (with the substitution of the Minister of Health for the confirming authority mentioned in section 449) apply to any bye-laws made or proposed to be made by the Port Authority in pursuance of this section and the provisions of that Act shall have effect as if bye-laws made by the Port Authority in pursuance of this section were bye-laws made by them relating to their jurisdiction under Part VI. of that Act. The Port Sanitary Authority and the Port of London Authority are at present engaged in drafting Bye-laws under this Act. LANDING OF LIVE CATTLE AT TILBURY. In the latter part of the year No. 1 Shed, Tilbury Dock, was equipped for the landing of imported cattle, and on December 25th, the first consignment of 605 head of cattle from Canada was landed. The Port Sanitary Authority have accepted the responsibilities of a Sanitary Authority under the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Animals (Importation) Order, 1930, Part III., Article 22, Part IV., Articles 23, 24 and 25, and the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Animals (Landing from Ireland, Channel Islands and Isle of Man) Order, 1933, Part II., Article 17. TRAINING SHIPS. During the year the Training Ship "Arethusa" was broken up and the whole establishment was removed to Upnor in the River Medway, outside the jurisdiction of the Port Sanitary Authority. The six Training Ships now within the district of the Port of London Sanitary Authority are as follows:— "Cornwall" Lying at Denton. "Exmouth" „Grays. "Warspite" „ Grays. "Worcester" „ Greenhithe. "Stork" „ Hammersmith. "Triton" „ Gravesend. The following cases of Infectious Disease occurred on these vessels during the year:— T.S. "Exmouth" 1 case of Scarlet Fever. T.S. "Arethusa" 1 „ „ „ T.S. "Cornwall" 6 cases „ „ T.S. "Triton" 8 „ LEGAL PROCEEDINGS. Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Offence. Police Court. Result. July 7 Houseboat " Harriet " 1. Dilapidated and leaking condition of hull. Grays, Essex. Closing Order 2. Defective condition of the skylight over the living accommodation. issued. 3. Defective condition of deck over the living accommodation. 4. Defective condition of flooring of the living accommodation. 5. The absence of suitable closet accommodation. 6. The generally dilapidated condition of the interior of the living accommodation. 7. The generally dirty and insanitary condition of the living accommodation, fore cabin, hold, bilge and deck. 64 Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Offence. Police Court. Result. July 7 Houseboat "Larking" 1. Defective and leaking condition of the roof and walls of the living accommodation. Grays, Essex. Closing Order issued. 2. The defective condition of floor boards both inside and outside the living accommodation. 3. The absence of sufficient natural light in the living accommodation. 4. The absence of a door or other means of closing the living accommodation against the access of the weather. 5. The generally dirty and insanitary condition of the living accommodation. 6. The absence of closet accommodation. Sept. 29 ss. "Viceroy of India" Attempt to import a parrakeet in contravention of the Parrots (Prohibition of Import) Regulations, 1930. Grays, Essex. Fined 40s. BYE-LAWS—OFFENSIVE CARGOES. Six cases of infringement of the above-mentioned Bye-laws were reported during the period covered by this Report. Written notice was sent to the owners of the lighters:— Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Owner. Infringement. April 29 Barge "Otho" Cory Lighterage, Ltd. Carrying an offensive cargo, to wit, dock refuse, which was not properly and securely covered so as to prevent a nuisance arising therefrom and loaded to a height of two feet above the coamings. May 22 Ltr. "Caucasian" Cory Lighterage, Ltd. Carrying an offensive cargo, to wit, house refuse, which was not properly and securely covered so as to prevent a nuisance arising therefrom and loaded to a height of five feet above the coamings. „ 26 Ltr. "Puma" Cory Lighterage, Ltd. Carrying an offensive cargo, to wit, dock refuse, which was not properly and securely covered so as to prevent a nuisance arising therefrom and loaded to a height of three feet above the coamings. Dec. 18 Ltr. "Barbs" W. R. Cunis, Ltd. Carrying an offensive cargo, to wit, house refuse, which was not properly and securely covered so as to prevent a nuisance arising therefrom and loaded to a height of six feet above the coamings. „ 18 Ltr. "Muff" W. B. Cunis, Ltd. Ditto „ 18 Ltr. "Frank" W. R. Cunis, Ltd. Ditto. 65 PARROTS (Prohibition of Import) REGULATIONS, 1930. 394 parrots, &c., came under the notice of your Officers during the year. 117 Notices were issued in respect of 143 parrots, &c. Number exported in respect of Notices served 134 Number destroyed (Notice served to export) 9 Number destroyed. (No Notice served. Birds destroyed on arrival) 12 Number exported (not time to serve Notice owing to short stay of vessel) 26 Number admitted under Ministry of Health permits 213 Of this number, 10 birds died and the bodies were sent for investigation as follows:— 9 to Ministry of Health. 1 to Zoological Society. 394 In addition, seven parrots were reported as having died in vessels during the voyage, the bodies being destroyed before arrival in the Port. VISITORS TO THE PORT SANITARY DISTRICT. During the year the following Medical Officers visited the Port of London to study the Sanitary Administration either in general or in some particular respect:— Dr. D. Pablo Cartana, of Barcelona. Dr. Med. H. Grundgand, of Poland. VISIT OF THE COUNCIL OF THE METROPOLITAN BRANCH OF THE SOCIETY OF MEDICAL OFFICERS OF HEALTH. On Friday, 28th April, the above Council, which comprises the Medical Officers of Health of the Metropolitan Boroughs, visited the District of the Port of London Sanitary Authority at the invitation of your Chairman. The party left Westminster Pier on the m.l. "Joseph White" at 10 a.m. and proceeded to the Royal Albert Dock, where a demonstration on a small scale of the use of prussic acid gas as a fumigant for rat destruction was given by Messrs. The Fumigation Services, Ltd., on board the ss. "Rangitiki," by kind permission of Messrs. The New Zealand Shipping Co., Ltd. The party then proceeded to No. 6 Cold Store, where a demonstration of meat inspection was given. The principal Meat Importers kindly co-operated by staging an exhibition of the various classes of imported meats and offal. Subsequently visits were paid to the "Hygeia," "Howard Deighton," your Hospital at Denton and the Passenger Landing Stage at Tilbury, the return journey being made to London by train. The visitors thoroughly enjoyed the hospitality of your Chairman, and, thanks to the co-operation of the Port of London Authority, Messrs. The Fumigation Services, Ltd., Messrs. The New Zealand Shipping Co., Ltd., the Meat Importers, the work of many members of your Staff, and to fine weather, your visitors were unanimous in their expression of interest and pleasure in all they had seen. CANAL BOATS ACTS. In accordance with Section 3 of the Canal Boats Act, 1884, I beg to present herewith the Annual Report on the working of the Canal Boats Acts and Regulations within the district of the Port of London Sanitary Authority during the year ended 31st December, 1933. 66 The Acts and Regulations apply within the whole district under the jurisdiction of the Port of London Sanitary Authority, including the River and Docks, as a "canal" for the purposes of the Acts "includes any river, inland navigation, lake or water being within the body of a county, whether it is or not within the ebb and flow of the tide." The navigation, in addition to the enclosed Docks, includes the following navigable tributary waters and creeks of the River Thames:— On the right bank— On the left bank— From Teddington downwards :— From Teddington downwards :— Wandsworth Creek (River Wandle). The entrance of the Eiver Brent. Hay's Dock. Hammersmith Creek. St. Saviour's Dock. Chelsea Creek. Part of the Grand Surrey Canal within the Grosvenor Dock. Surrey Commercial Dock. Limekiln Creek. Deadman's Dock. Bow Creek (River Lea). Deptford Creek (Eiver Eavensbourne). Barking Creek (Eiver Boding). Dartford Creek (Rivers Cray and Darenth). Rainham Creek (River Ingrebourne). The entrance to Gravesend Canal. Mucking Creek. Cliffe Creek. Thames Haven and Hole Haven. Yantlet and Coalmouth Creeks. Havengore Creek. Part of the River Medway, and of the Swale. River Roach as far as Rochford. RIVER. The whole of this area is divided into three districts, known as the Upper, Middle and Lower; each district is in charge of an Inspector, as follows:— Upper Distbict Teddington to Greenwich Inspector Wright, £200 per annum. Middle District Greenwich to Erith Inspector Wright, £200 per annum. Lower District Erith to the seaward limits of the ) Port (including part of the River Medway). Inspector Beattie, £220 per annum. DOCKS. The Docks are divided into four districts, known as the Central, Eastern, Western and the Gravesend District:— Central District West India Dock Inspector Elward, £400 per annum. South West India Dock Poplar Dock Millwall Dock Eastern District Royal Victoria Dock Inspector Gray, £360 per annum. East India Dock Royal Albert Dock Inspector Lambe, £400 per annum. King George V. Dock Western District London Dock Inspector Coombe, £340 per annum. St. Katharine Dock Regent's Canal Dock Surrey Commercial Dock Inspector Johnson, £300 per annum. Gravesend District Tilbury Dock Inspector Edwards, £230 per annum. Left Shore of River, from Purfleet down Eight Shore of River, from Erith down INSPECTIONS. The total number of inspections for the year was 205, representing a nett number of 87 boats. The remainder—118—represents repeated visits by Inspectors of this Authority. The number of boats not conforming to the Acts and Regulations was 16, (inspected on 16 occasions), or 7.8 per cent. of the total inspections, the percentage for the previous five years being 21.22 per cent. 67 New Boats Registered. No new boats were registered during the year. Infringements in respect of:— Notification of Change of Master. Nil. Absence of Certificate of Registration. 1933. Jan. 5 "Harry" Registered Uxbridge No. 322 „ 5 "Severn" „ Brentford No. 502 Mar. 20 "Joan" „ Uxbridge No. 581 „ 20 "Dart" „ Brentford No. 453 May 3 "Alfred" „ Uxbridge No. 431 Nov. 7 "Gwendoline" „ Port of London No. 504 Dec. 11 "Eliza" „ Brentford No. 452 Certificate not Identifying Owner with Boat. 1933. Aug. 14 "Trent" Registered Uxbridge No. 497 Marking, &c. Nil. Overcrowding. Nil. Partition Separating Sexes. Nil. Males over Age. Nil. Females over Age. Nil. Cleanliness. No boat was detained for cleansing during the year. Painting. 1933 Jan. 4 "Charles" Begistered Brentford No. 210 Aug. 25 "Leige" „ Uxbridge No. 495 Ventilation. Nil. Dilapidation. 1933. Jan. 4 "Charles" Registered Brentford No. 210 „ 4 "Pam" „ Port of London No. 529 Mar. 1 "Wilfred" „ „ „ No. 461 „ 28 "Ada" „ Berkhampstead No, 404 May 6 "Wey" „ Port of London No. 478 June 21 "Marion" „ „ „ No. 487 Aug. 25 "Leige" „ Uxbridge No. 495 Removal of Bilge Water. Nil. Without Pump. Nil. 68 Refusal to admit Inspector. Nil. No proper Water Vessel. 1933. Nov. 2 "Upwood" Registered Birmingham No. 1311 Double Bulkheads. Nil. Notification of Infectious Disease. Nil. Register. On the 31st December, 1938, there were 237 boats on the Register:— Propelled by Tugs and Oars 215 „ „ Steam 15 „ „ Motors 7 TABLE OF CANAL BOATS CARRYING CHILDREN ON BOARD. Year. No. of Boats. No. of Boats with Children. No. of Children. Average No. of Children per Boat. Percentage of Boats with Children. 1924 164 27 73 3.04 16.46 1925 279 67 168 2.50 24.01 1926 120 31 157 5.06 25.08 1927 83 19 66 3.04 22.89 1928 79 15 66 4.15 18.98 1929 82 20 96 4.80 24.39 1930 91 13 35 2.70 14.29 1931 108 20 40 2.00 18.52 1932 94 12 28 2.33 12.77 1933 87 14 28 2.00 16.09 I have the honour to be, Gentlemen, Your obedient Servant, CHAS. F. WHITE, Medical Officer of Health, Port of London. 69 SUMMARY OF CANAL BOATS FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31st DECEMBER, 1933. Jan. Feb. March. April. May. June. July. Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. TOTAL 1928. Total for Years 1932. 1929. 1930. 1931. New boats registered - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7 7 8 9 2 Registration owing to structural alteration - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Registration for other purposes - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - No. of Inspections 21 12 27 9 26 30 11 25 9 11 15 9 205 128 127 147 295 236 Conforming to Acts and Regulations 18 12 23 9 24 28 11 23 9 11 12 9 189 76 103 104 252 200 Infringements in respect of:— - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Registration - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8 7 9 12 2 Notification of change of Master - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Absence of Certificate 2 - 2 - 1 — — — — — 2 — 7 10 5 17 23 7 Certificate not identifying owner with boat - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 1 1 — — Marking, &c. - - - - - - - 1 - - - - 1 12 2 3 4 4 Overcrowding - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 — Partition separating sexes - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Males over age - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Females over age - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Cleanliness - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 5 — — Painting 1 - - - - - - 1 - - - - 2 10 5 6 3 6 Ventilation - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3 1 4 3 3 Dilapidation 2 — 3 - 1 1 — 2 — - — — 9 21 5 20 13 18 Removal of bilge water - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Without pump - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Refusal to admit Inspector - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - No proper water vessel — — — - - — — — — — 1 — 1 — — 2 1 1 Double bulkheads - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Notification of infectious disease - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Detained for cleansing - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Proceedings taken - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 - - - - Written cautions given 2 - 2 - - — - 2 — — 2 - 8 43 11 16 15 11 Cautions attended to 2 — 2 — 1 1 1 — — — 1 1 9 20 22 20 24 13 Total registered by Port Sanitary Authority since 1887 554 Cancelled 317 Actual number on Register, 81st December, 1933 237 70 APPENDIX I. MEDICAL INSPECTION. From 1st January to 31st December, 1933. (a) Gravesend. Jan. Feb. March A pril May June July August Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Total. No. Medically Inspected 132 98 109 121 143 121 157 151 122 138 162 146 1,600 No. of Passengers 1,025 791 1,731 1,391 1,490 3,347 3,132 2,478 2,154 2,065 1,177 936 21,717 No. of Crews 4,770 4,724 5,090 5,267 5,471 4,657 5,078 5,635 4,287 4,985 6,483 6,168 62,615 No. of Foreign Arrivals 897 767 897 885 1,011 1,044 1,205 1,237 1,180 1,175 1,148 994 12,440 (b) Sheerness. Jan. Feb. March April May June July August Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Total. No. Medically Inspected 10 7 11 12 14 22 17 21 16 20 20 14 184 No. of Passengers - - - - - - - - - - - - - No. of Crews 195 126 198 227 302 445 355 419 334 399 412 275 3,687 No. of Foreign Arrivals 35 37 46 43 56 59 61 57 56 56 62 54 622 APPENDIX II. Infectious Disease. Disease. 1924. 1925. 1926. 1927. 1928. 1929. 1930. 1931. 1932. Mean Annual No. for 10 years ending 31st Dec., 1933. 1933. (a) Cases Reported: Cholera (including suspected cases) 1 — 26 6 5 2 1 1 3 4.5 — Yellow Fever (ditto) - — 2 — — — — — — .2 - Plague (ditto) 1 3 1 — 2 1 — — — .8 — Small-pox 17 27 20 14 8 22 11 14 14 15.1 4 Scarlet Fever 8 22 6 17 16 11 29 7 12 14.9 21 Diphtheria 23 23 13 13 13 17 9 16 10 14.4 7 Enteric Fever 42 49 50 36 72 46 25 23 23 39.5 29 Measles 46 77 94 21 47 48 50 11 25 44.5 26 German Measles 18 14 7 5 65 9 6 3 22 15.3 4 Erysipelas 5 2 5 2 4 4 2 2 2 2.9 1 Typhus Fever — - - - - - - - - - - Continued Fever 2 - 4 2 2 - 1 — - 1.1 - Relapsing Fever — - — — 1 — — — - .1 - Tuberculosis:— Pulmonary 90 82 86 82 86 126 116 147 135 109.8 148 Other kinds 6 11 2 1 4 7 4 4 4 4.4 1 Other diseases (including Chicken-pox) 319 363 471 667 499 653 904 1,118 791 624.5 460 Total 578 673 787 866 824 946 1,158 1,346 1,041 892.0 701 (b) Treated in Port Sanitary Hospital: Cholera (including suspected cases) - - - - - - - - - - - Yellow Fever (ditto) - - - - - - - - - - - Plague (ditto) - - - - - - - - - - Small-pox — 3 5 3* — 4 — — — 1.5 — Typhus Fever — — — — — — — — — — — Scarlet Fever 6 16 8 5* 5 7 12* — 4 7.8 15 Diphtheria 1 4 2 6 9 5 3 1 4 3.9 4 Enteric Fever 13 6 14 6 20 23 9 4 9 11.0 6 Measles 8 7 9 7† 11 ‡18 **12 — 1 7.5 2 Erysipelas 1 — 2 - 1 — 1 — — .5 — Parotitis — — — — — — - 21 2 2.7 4 Continued Fever — — — - - - - - - - - Other diseases (including Chicken-pox) 31 39 23 20 29 30 *19 *23 33 26.9 22 Total 60 75 63 47 75 87 56 49 53 61.8 53 * Includes one contact. ** Includes three contacts. † Includes two contacts. ‡ Includes six contacts. 71 APPENDIX III.—Cholera. Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. of Cases. Passenger or Crew Rating. How dealt with. (a) Landed from Vessels—Nil. (b) Died, Landed elsewhere or well on Arrival— June 25 ss. "Dumana" Calcutta 1 Crew Died. Buried at sea. Total 11 (Crew) APPENDIX IV.—Small-pox. Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. of Cases. Passenger or Crew Rating. How dealt with. (a) Landed from Vessels—Nil. (b) Died, Landed elsewhere or well on Arrival— Feb. 10 ss. "Strathaird" Brisbane 1 Pass Landed at Suez. Mar. 10 ss. "Rawalpindi" Bombay 1 Crew Landed at Aden. May 26 ss. "Rajputana" Bombay 1 Pass Died in Hospital at Aden. Sept. 11 ss. "Clan Macquarrie" Chittagong 1 Crew Landed at Suez. (2 Crew) Total 4 (2 Passengers) APPENDIX V.—Scarlet Fever. Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. of Cases. Passenger or Crew Rating. How dealt with. (a) Landed from Vessels— Mar. 12 T.S. "Exmouth" Lying at Grays 1 Cadet Admitted to London County Council Eastern Hospital. „ 19 T.S. "Arethusa" Lying at Greenhithe. 1 Cadet Admitted to London County Council Eastern Hospital. April 21 ss. "Oil Pioneer" Batoum 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. May 27 ss. "Balranald" Brisbane 1 Pass. Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. July 14 ss. "Royal Archer Leith 1 Crew Admitted to London County Council Eastern Hospital. Sept. 28 T.S. "Cornwall" Lying off Dent on 1 Daughter of Captain Superintendent. Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. Oct. 23 T.S. "Cornwall" Lying off Gravesend. 1 Cadet Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. „ 24 T.S. "Triton" (Gravesend Sea School.) Lying off Gravesend. 1 Cadet Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital Denton. „ 25 T.S. "Triton" (Gravesend Sea School.) Lying off Gravesend. 2 Cadets Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. „ 28 T.S."Cornwall" Lying off Gravesend. 1 Cadet Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. Carried forward 11 72 Scarlet Fever—continued. Date. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. of Cases. Passenger or Crew Rating. How dealt with. 1933. Brought forward 11 Oct. 28 T.S. "Cornwall" Lying off Denton 1 Cadet Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. „ 29 T.S. "Cornwall" Lying off Denton 1 Cadet Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. Nov. 1 T.S. "Triton" (Gravesend Sea School.) Lying off Gravesend. 1 Cadet Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. „ 4 T.S. "Triton" (Gravesend Sea School.) Lying off Gravesend. 1 Cadet Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. „ 6 T.S. "Triton" (Gravesend Sea School.) Lying off Gravesend. 1 Cadet Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. „ 10 T.S. "Triton" (Gravesend Sea School.) Lying off Gravesend. 1 Cadet Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. „ 14 T.S. "Cornwall" Lying off Denton 1 Cadet Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. „ 17 T.S. "Triton" (Gravesend Sea School.) Lying off Gravesend. 1 Cadet Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. „ 23 T.S. "Triton" (Gravesend Sea School.) Lying off Gravesend. 1 Cadet Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. (2 Crew) Total 20 (2 Passengers) (16 Cadets) (b) Died, Landed elsewhere or well on Arrival—Nil. (c) Resident in Port Sanitary District— Oct. 19 Brunswick House Brunswick Wharf, Blackwall. 1 Resident. Removed to London County Council Isolation Hospital. Total 1 (Resident) APPENDIX VI.—Diphtheria. Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. of Cases. Passenger or Crew Rating. How dealt with. (a) Landed from Vessels— April 24 ss. "Glenarch" Newlyn 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. May 1 ss. "Port Wellington" Hamburg 1 Crew Admitted to Plaistow Isolation Hospital. „ 8 ss. "City of Hong Kong" Capetown 3 Pass. Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. Oct. 2 ss. "Trafford Hall" Hamburg 1 Pass. Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. „ 6 ss. "Veronica" Leningrad 1 Crew Removed to a Nursing Home. (3 Crew) Total 7 (4 Passengers) (b) Died, Landed elsewhere or well on Arrival—Nil. 73 APPENDIX VII.—Enteric Fever. 1983. Date. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. of Cases. Passenger or Crew Rating. How dealt with. (a) Landed from Vessels— Feb. 17 ss. " Oxfordshire " Rangoon 1 Crew Admitted lo Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. „ 22 ss. " Yasbukuni Mara " Yokohama 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. liar. 3 ss. " Menelaus " Vladivostock 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. April 22 ss. "Afric Star" River Plate 5 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Royal Albert Dock. May 17 ss. " Rangitane " Wellington 1 Pass. Admitted to Empire Nursing Home, Westminster, S.W. June 15 ss. " Sveinjarl " Pireaus 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. „ 23 ss. " Carthage " Yokohama 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. July 1 ss. "Moldavia" Brisbane 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. Oct. 26 ss. " Orama " Brisbane 1 Crew Removed to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. Nov. 5 ss. " Katori Maru " Yokohama 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, — (13 Crew) Denton. Total 14 (1 Passenger) (b) Died, Landed elsewhere or well on Arrival— = Jan. 7 ss. " Cheshire " Rangoon 1 Pass. Landed at Marseilles. „ 13 ss. " Strathnaver " Australia 1 Pass. Landed at Marseilles. Feb. 24 ss. " Narkunda " Brisbane 1 Pass. Convalescent. Proceeded to a Nursing Home at St. Leonards. Mar. 5 ss. " Westhika " Panama City 1 Crew Landed at Plymouth. „ 10 ss. "Rawalpindi" Bombay 1 Pass. Well on arrival. April 13 ss. " Otranto " Brisbane 1 Pass. Landed at Southampton. May 5 ss. "Strathnaver" Sydney 2 Crew 1 Landed at Bombay. „ 16 ss. Opawa " Lyttleton 1 Crew 1 Well on arrival. Well on arrival. June 2 ss. " Strathaird " Bombay 1 Pass. Landed at Marseilles. ,, 4 m. v. " Macgregor Laird " Freetown 1 Crew Landed at Hull. „ 21 ss. " Ulysses " Brisbane 1 Pass. Convalescent on arrival. ,, 28 ss. " Llandaff Castle " Africa 1 Pass. Landed at Southampton. July 26 ss. " Manela " Calcutta 1 Pass. Landed at Port Said= Dec. 8 ss. "Rawalpindi" Yokohama 1 Crew Landed at Bombay. — (6 Crew) Total 15 (9 Passengers) APPENDIX VIII.—Measles. 1983. Date. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. of Cases. Passenger or Crew Rating. How dealt with. (a) Landed from Vessels— Jan. 30 ss. " Suecia " Goteborg 1 Pass. Proceeded to an address in Hammersmith. April 10 ss. " City of York " 1 Calcutta 1 Pass. Proceeded home in private conveyance. May 8 ss. " Suecia " Goteborg 1 Pass. Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital,, Denton. Oct. 18 ss. " Yew Tree " Burnt Island 1 Crew Removed to Port. (1 Crew) Sanitary Hospital,, Denton. Total 4 (3 fassengers) 74 Measles—conitued ]Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. of cases. Passenge or Crew Rating. How dealt with. (b) Died, Landed elsewhere or well on Arrival— Feb. 7 ss. " Penland " New York 1 Pass. Well on arrival. Mar. 20 ss. " Viceroy of India " Bombay 1 Pass. Convalescent on arrival. „ 31 ss. "Rajputana" Yokohama 1 Pass. Landed at Plymouth. April 4 ss. " Manela " Calcutta 9 Pass. Well on arrival. „ 10 ss. " City of York " Calcutta 2 Pass. Well on arrival. „ 24 ss. " Lapland " Cruising 1 Pass. Well on arrival. May 26 ss. "Rajputana" Bombay 1 Pass. Well on arrival. June 22 ss. " Highland Brigade " Buenos Aires 1 Pass. Landed at Lisbon. Aug. 16 ss. " Rotorua " - Auckland 1 Pass. Well on arrival. Oct. 27 ss. " Matiana " Beira 1 Crew Convalescent on arrival. Dec. 2 ss. " Remuera " Auckland 1 Crew Well on arrival. „ 8 ss. " Diomed " Kobe 1 Pass. Landed at Port Said. „ 13 ss. " Llandaff Castle " Mombasa 1 Pass. Landed at Southampton. — (2 Crew) Total 22 (20 Passengers) APPENDIX IX.—German Measles. Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. oi Cases. Passenger : or Crew Rating. How dealt with. (a) Landed from Vessels— Sept. 5 ss. " Laguna Belle " Pleasure Steamer 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. Total 1 (Crew) (b) Died, Landed elsewhere or well on Arrival— Jan. 25 ss. "Sarpedon" Dairen 1 Pass. Well on arrival. Mar. 3 ss. "Carthage" Yokohama 1 Pass. Well on arrival. May 12 ss. " Mongolia " Atlantic Cruise 1 Crew Well on arrival. — (1 Crew) Total 3 (2 Passengers) APPENDIX X.—Erysipelas. Date; 1933. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. of Cases. Passenger or Crew Rating How dealt with. (a) Landed from Vessels— April 4 ss. " Aurania " New York 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. Total 1 (Crew) (b) Died, Landed elsewhere or well on Arrival—Nil. APPENDIX XI.—Pulmonary Tuberculosis. Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. of Cases. Passenger or Crew Rating. How dealt with. {a) Landed from Vessels— Jan. 5 ss. " Tuscan Star " Buenos Aires 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. „ 12 ss. " Mulbera " Calcutta 1 Pass. Proceeded home. „ 20 ss. "Ranpura" Yokohama 2 Pass. Proceeded to Royal Naval Hospital, Chatham. Carried forwari I 4 75 Pulmonary Tuberculosis—continued. Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. 1 Where from. Brought forward No.of Cases 4 Passenger or Crew Rating. How dealt with. Feb. 3 ss. " Kaisar-i-Hind " Yokohama 1 Pass. Proceeded in charge of Military Authorities. ,, 16 ss. " Ranchi " Yokohama 4 Pass. 1 Proceeded home. 3 Proceeded in charge of Military Authorities. Mar. 2 ss. " Baradine " Brisbane 1 Crew Admitted toSeamen's Hospital, Royal Albert Dock. ,, 3 ss. "Carthage" Yokohama 1 Pass. Landed in charge of Naval Authorities. „ 5 ss. "Port Sydney" Brisbane 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. „ 10 ss. "Moldavia" Noumea 1 Pass. Proceeded home. „ 27 ss. " Margha " Bombay 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. „ 31 ss. "Rajputana" Yokohama 1 Pass. Proceeded in charge of Military Authorities. April 2 ss " Hakone Maru " Yokohama 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Royal Albert Dock. „ 4 ss. "Manela" Calcutta 1 Pass. Both admitted to 1 Crew Seamen's Hospital, Royal Albert Dock. 13 ss " Corfu" Yokohama Pass. Proceeded in charge of Military Authorities. 14 ss "Andalucia Star " Buenos Aires 1 Pass. Proceeded home. „ 25 ss " Llanstephan Castle " Dar-es-Salaam 1 Pass. Admitted to aLondon Nursing Home. „ ' 29 ss. " Barrabool" Brisbane Pass. Proceeded home. May 12 ss. " Ranpura " Yokohama Pass. Proceeded in charge of Military Authorities. „ 17 ss. " Rangitane " Wellington 1 Pass. Proceeded home. „ 19 ss. " Mooltan " Brisbane 1 Pass. Proceeded home. „ 23 ss. " Taranaki " New Zealand 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. „ 26 ss. " Clan Morrison " Marmagoa 1 Crew Remained on board. June 9 ss. " Ranchi" Yokohama Pass. Proceeded home. „ 9 ss. "Stirlingshire" Hobart 1 Crew Isolated on board for return to India. „ 20 ss. " Katori Maru " Yokohama 1 Crew Isolated on board for return to Japan. „ 23 ss. "Carthage" Yokohama 1 Crew Isolated on board for return to India. July 1 ss. " Moldavia " Brisbane 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Tilbury. „ 11 ss. "Ruahine" Lyttleton 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. „ 21 ss. "Ballarat" Brisbane 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. 3 Pass. Proceeded in care of' Army and Air ForceAuthorities. „ 21 ss. " Kaisar-I-Hind " Yokohama 5 Pass. Proceeded in care of Army and Air Force Authorities. 1 Crew Proceeded in care of Shipping Company Carried forward 48 76 Pulmonary Tuberculosis—continued. Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Where from. Brought forward No. of Cases. 48 Passenger or Crew Rating. How dealt with. July 26 ss. "Ruahine" New Zealand 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. Aug. 3 ss. " Otranto " Sydney 3 Pass. All proceeded home. „ 5 ss. "Mantua" Yokohama 2 Pass. Both proceeded home. „ 14 ss. " Suwa Maru " Yokohama I Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Royal Albert Dock. „ 18 ss. "Rawalpindi" Yokohama 1 Pass. Proceeded home. 10 Pass. Proceeded in care of Naval and Military Authorities. „ 20 ss. "Alaunia" Montreal 1 Pass. Proceeded home. Sept. 8 ss. " Mooltan " Brisbane 2 Pass. Proceeded to Netley Hospital in care of Military Authorit ies. „ 11 ss. " Aurania " Montreal l Pass. Proceeded home. „ 14 ss. " Balranald " Brisbane 9 Pass. 1 proceeded home. 7 proceeded in care of Military Authorities. 1 proceeded in care of Naval Authorities. „ 16 ss. "Rajputana" Yokohama 1 Pass. Proceeded home. „ 20 ss. " City of Barcelona " Middlesbrough 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. „ 22 ss. " Chitral" Bombay 1 Crew Proceeded in care of Naval Authorities. „ 29 ss. " Ranchi " Yokohama 2 Pass. Proceeded home. „ 29 ss. " Esperance Bay " Australia 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. „ 29 ss. " Dora Isabel" 1 Crew . Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. Oct. 12 ss. " Bendigo " Sydney 1 Pass. Proceeded home. 1 Pass. Proceeded in care of Royal Army Medical Corps. „ 19 ss. " Matra " Middlesbrough 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. „ 19 ss. "Limerick" Fremantle 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. „ 19 ss. " Durham Castle " Beira 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. 22 ss. " Castelar " Spanish Ports 1 Pass. idmitted to St. George's Hospital, Shadwell, E. „ 25 ss. " Viceroy of India " Bombay 1 Pass. Proceeded in care of Royal Army Medical Corps. „ 27 ss. " Port Campbell" New Zealand 1 Crew Proceeded home. „ 27 ss. " Naldera " Shanghai 1 Pass Admitted to St. Bartholomew's Hospital, London. Nov. 9 ss. " Baradine " Brisbane 1 Pass. Proceeded home. „ 16 ss. "Ruahine" Wellington 1 Crew . Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. Dec. 1 ss. ' " Maloja " Brisbane 1 Crew Landed at Bombay. „ 4 ss. " Ballarat" Brisbane 1 Pass. Alien. Proceeded to Sweden. „ 8 ss. "Rawalpindi" Yokohama 1 Pass. Landed at Plymouth. „ 22 ss. " Comorin " Shanghai 1 Pass. Landed at Marseilles. — (27 Crew) Total 101 (74 Pass.) 77 Pulmonary Tuberculosis—continued. Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. of 2ases. Passenger or Crew Rating. How dealt with. (&) Died, Landed elsewhere or well on Arrival— Jan. 1 ss. "Comorin" Yokohama 4 Pass. 3 Landed at Plymouth. 1 Landed at Marseilles. „ 19 ss. " Largs Bay " Brisbane 1 Pass. Died, buried at Suez. Feb. 10 ss. "Strathaird" Brisbane 1 Pass. Landed at Marseilles. „ 16 ss. " Oronsay " Brisbane 1 Crew Died. Buried at sea. „ 27 ss. "Alaunia" St. John's 1 Pass In transit for Denmark. Mar. 3 ss. '' Carthage " Yokohama 2 Pass. 1 Landed at Hong Kong. lLandedatPlymouth. „ 8 ss. " Specialist" Georgetown 1 Crew Landed at Demerara. „ 16 ss. "Highland Chieftain" Buenos Aires 1 Crew In transit to Belgrade. „ 17 ss. "Naldera" Yokohama 1 Pass. Landed at Plymouth. April 28 ss. "Rawalpindi" Bombay 1 Pass. Died. Buried at sea. May 12 ss. " Madura " Beira 1 Pass. Convalescent on arrival. „ 25 ss. " Orama " Australia 2 Pass. Landed at Southampton. „ 30 ss. " Largs Bay " Brisbane 2 Pass. Landed at Southampton. June 9 ss. " Ranchi " Yokohama 1 Pass. Landed at Plymouth. „ 16 ss. " Narkunda " Sydney 3 Pass. Convalescent on arrival. „ 22 ss. " Highland Brigade" Buenos Aires 1 Pass. Landed at Boulogne. „ 23 ss. " Carthage " Yokohama 1 Pass. Landed at Plymouth. 1 Crew Landed at Marseilles. July 6 ss. " Highland Patriot " Buenos Aires 1 Pass. Landed at Vigo. „ 7 ss. " Naldera " Kobe 1 Pass. Landed at Plymouth. Aug. 18 ss. "Rawalpindi" Yokohama 3 Pass. Landed at Plymouth. Oct. 7 ss. "Stentor" Java 1 Crew Died and buried at Penang. „ 12 ss. " Bendigo " Sydney 1 Pass. Landed at Plymouth. Nov. 9 ss. " Baradine " Brisbane 1 Pass. Landed at Plymouth in care of Naval Authorities. „ 10 ss. " Corfu " Hong Kong 2 Pass. Landed at Plymouth in care of Naval Authorities. „ 10 ss. " Benvorlich " New Westminster 1 Crew Landed at Colon. „ 17 ss. " Rajputana " Bombay 1 Crew Landed at Marseilles. Dec. 8 ss. " Rawalpindi" Yokohama 4 Pass. Admitted to Royal Herbert Hospital, Woolwich. „ 10 ss. " Sveadrott" San Pedro 1 Pass. Proceeded in care of relatives to Glasgow. „ 11 ss. " Domala " Calcutta 1 Pass. Landed in care of Royal Air Force Authorities. 21 ss. " Highland Chieftain " Buenos Aires 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Royal Albert Dock. „ 22 ss. "Orontes " Australia 2 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Tilbury — (10 Crew) Dock. Total 47 (37 Pass.) APPENDIX XII.—Tuberculosis (other kinds). Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. of Cases. Passenger or Crew Rating. How dealt with. (a) Landed from Vessels— Feb. 24 ss. ' ' Narkunda " Brisbane 1 Pass. Proceeded home. Total 1 (Passenger) (b) Died, Landed elsewhere or well on Arrival—Nil. 78 APPENDIX XIII.—Pneumonia. Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. of Cases. Passenger or Crew Rating. How dealt with. (a) Landed from Vessels— Jan. 19 ss. , "Orsova" Brisbane 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Tilbury. „ 31 ss . " Glen way " (Outward bound) 1 Crew Admitted to Gravesend and North Kent Hospital. Feb. 10 ss . "Strathaird" Brisbane 1 Pass. To attend Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Endsleigh Gardens, W.C. Mar. 10 ss " Clan Ranald " Moamagao 1 Crew Admitted toSeamen's Hospital, Tilbury. Aug. 6 ss " Tasmania " New Zealand 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Royal Albert Dock. Dec. 1 ss " Clan MacTaggart " Malabar Coast 1 Crew . Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Tilbury Dock. - (5 Crew) Total 6 (1 Passenger) (b) Died, Landed elsewhere or well on Arrival— Jan. 2 ss. "Ulysses" Cairns 1 Pass. Died ; body landed at Capetown. „ 27 ss. "Stentor" Macassar 1 Crew Landed to hospital at Sourabaya. May 26 ss. " City of Valencia " Calcutta 1 Pass. Convalescent on arrival. July 20 ss. "Discoverer" Barbadoes 1 Crew Landed at Barbadoes. Nov. 21 ss. " Ausonia " Montreal 1 Pass. Died; buried at sea. Dec. 16 ss. " Clan McBride " Marmagoa 1 Crew Landed at Oran. „ 21 ss. , " Pegu " Rangoon 1 Crew ] Landed at Port Said. — (4 Crew) Total 7 (3 Passengers) APPENDIX XIV.—Influenza. Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. of Cases. Passenger or Crew Rating. How dealt with. (a) Landed from Vessels— Jan. 6 ss. "Corncrake" Bremen 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. „ 13 ss. "Corglen" (Outward bound) 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton (for observation). „ 19 ss. "Oakman" Beaumont 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. „ 19 ss. " City of Alexandria " Hull 4 Crew Isolated on board. „ 22 ss. " Hirondelle " Antwerp 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. Feb. 2 ss. "Lapwing" Hamburg 1 Crew Remained on board. Nov. 23 ss. "Ormonde" Brisbane 1 Pass. Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Tilbury Dock. „ 30 ss. " Patroclus " Darien 1 Pass. Proceeded home in private conveyance. — (9 Crew) Total 11 (2 Passengers) 79 Influenza—continued. Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. of Cases Passengers Crew . Rating. How dealt with. (ib) Died, Landed elsewhere or well on Arrival— Jan. 6 ss. "Corncrake" Bremen 5 Crow Convalescent on arrival. „ 9 ss. "Basra" Takoradi 2 Crew Convalescent on arrival. „ 19 ss. "Oakman" Beaumont 3 Crew Convalescent on arrival. „ 21 ss. "Mode" Hull 1 Crew Convalescent on arrival. „ 24 ss. "Philomel" Bordeaux 1 Crew Died in Hospital at Bordeaux. „ 27 ss. "Sibier" Leningrad 3 Crew Well on arrival. „ 28 ss. "Farndale" Akassa 1 Crew Remained on board. May 25 ss. " Highland Chieftain " Buenos Aires 1 Crew Woll on arrival. June 14 ss. , " Poelau Tello " Batavia 1 Crew Remained on board. July 15 ss. "Cathay" Brisbane 10 Pass. Well on arrival. Oct. 12 ss. " Highland Chieftain " Biver Plate 1 Pass. Well on arrival. Nov. 2 ss. ."Cathay" Brisbane 16 Pass. All well on arrival. „ 23 ss. "Ormonde" Brisbane 2 Crew Convalescent on arrival. Dec. 2 ss, . " City of Hong Kong " Calcutta 2 Crew (22 Crew) Convalescent on arrival. Total 49 (27 Passengers) APPENDIX XV.—Dysentery. Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. of Cases. Passenger or Crew Rating. How dealt with. (a) Landed from Vessels— April 16 ss. "Mantua" Bombay 1 Crew To attend Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Endsleigh Gardens, W.C. July 14 ss. ' 'Myrmidon" Tjilatjap 1 Crew Admitted to Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Endsleigh Gardens. Total 2 (Crew) (b) Died, Landed elsewhere or well on Arrival— Nov. 8 ss. ' " Clan Murdoch " Vizagapatam 1 Crew Landed at Aden. Total 1 (Crew) APPENDIX XVI.—Malaria. Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Where from. No. of Cases. Passenger or Crew Rating. How dealt with. (a) Landed from Vessels— Mar. 25 ss. "Thornlea" Sapele 1 Crew Admitted toSeamen's Hospital, Tilbury. April 1 ss. " Queenmoor " Kilindini 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Royal Albert Dock. May 12 ss. " Bajamar " Teneriffe 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich. July 1 ss. "Moldavia" Brisbane 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton. „ 11 ss. " Barbara Marie " Burutu 1 Crew Admitted to Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Endsleigh Gardens, W.C. Carried forward 5 80 Malaria—con tinned Date 1933 Name of Vessel Where from Brought forward No of Cases 5 Passenger or Crew Rating How dealt with Oct 31 ss " City of Exeter " Laurenco Marques 1 Crew Admitted to Seamen's Hospital, Royal Albert Dock Dec 22 ss " Orontes " Australia 1 Pass Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton (6 Crew) Total 7 (1 Passeng er) (b) Died, Landei elsewhere or well on Arrival— Jan 6 ss " Nestlea u Burutu 2 Crew Well on arrival „ 10 ss " Tapanceli " Tjilatjap 5 Crew '" • 4 recovered 1 died buried at Sabang Feb 21 ss " British Consul " Abadan 1 Crew Convalescent on arrival „ 24 ss " Narkunda " Brisbane 1 Crew Died Buried at Colombo Mar 2 ss " William Wilberforce " Takoradi 1 Crew Landed at Las Palmas April 10 ss "Astronomer" Calcutta 1 Crew Well on arrival „ 28 ss "Mulbera" Calcutta 2 Crow Well on arrival May 7 ss "Deido" Duala 2 Crew Paid off in Hamburg „ 15 ss " Ingoma " Demerara 1 Pass Well on arrival „ 18 ss " Masula " Bombay 1 Crew Well on arrival July 3 ss " Alfred Jones " Sapele 4 Crew Well on arrival „ 11 ss " Barbara Marie " Burutu 1 Crew Landed at Lagos Aug 18 ss "Rawalpindi" Yokohama 3 Crew Well on arrival „ 29 ss " Tabinta " Batavia 1 Pass Died Buried at sea Sept 4 ss ' William Wilberforce ' West Africa 5 Crew 1 Landed at Warri Oct 31 ss " Ranpura " Bombay 1 Crew 4 Well on arrival Well on arrival Nov 21 ss " Macgregor Laird " Africa 3 Crew 2 Well on arrival 1 Convalescent on arrival Dec 1 ss " Henry Stanley" West Africa 1 Crew Well on arrival — (34 Crew) Total 36 (2 Passeng ers) APPENDIX XVII—Chicken-pox Date 1983 Name of Vessel Where from No of Cases Passenger or Crew Rating How dealt with (a) Landed from Vessels— Feb 3 ss "Manaar" Calcutta 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton „ 10 ss "Strathaird" Brisbane 1 Pass Allowed to proceed to Tver, Bucks, by private conveyance Mar 24 ss " Naldera " Yokohama 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton April 30 ss " Somali " Moji and coastwise 3 Crew 2 admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton 1 remained in Hospital on board May 1 ss ' ' Malda " Middlesbrough 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton Aug 5 ss "Mantua' Yokohama 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton „ 17 ss "Mantua" Yokohama 1 Crew (8 Crew) Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton Total 9 (1 Passengers) 81 Chicken-pox—continued Date 1933 Name of Vessel Where from No of Cases Passenger or Crew Rating How dealt with (b) Died, Landed elsewheee or well on Arrival— April 6 ss " Llandaff Castle " Beira 1 Pass Landed at Southampton „ 10 ss "Somali" Mogi 2 Crew 1 Landed at Colombo 1 Landed atMarseilles „ 13 ss '"Corfu" Yokohama 1 Pass Well on arrival „ 15 ss "Modasa" Calcutta 1 Pass Well on arrival „ 21 ss " Maloja " Brisbane 1 Pars Well on arrival May 19 ss June 25 ss , " Clan Buchanan " " Alaunia " Tellicherry Montreal 1 1 Crew Pass Well on arrival Convalescent on arrival Sept 14 ss " Balranald " Brisbane 3 Pass Well on arrival Oct 25 ss " Viceroy of India " Bombay 1 Crew Landed at Bombay Dec 13 ss " Llandaff Castle " Mombasa 1 Pass Landed at Southampton — (4 Crew) Total 13 (9 Passenge srs) APPENDIX XVIII—Cerebro-Spinal Meningitis Date 1933 Name of Vessel Where from No of Cases Passenger or Crew Rating How dealt with (a) Landed from Vessels—Nil (b) Died, Landed elsewhere or well on Arrival— June 19 ss " British Commodore " Abadan 1 Crew Admitted to Hospital in Dunkirk APPENDIX XIX—MUMPS Date 1933 Name of Ve ssel Where from No of Cases Passengers or Crew Rating How dealt with (a) Landed from Vessels— Jan 2 ss "Suecia" Goteborg 1 Pass Proceeded home „ 17 ss ' "Llanstephan Cas itle" Beira 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton Mar 27 ss " Clan Macfarlar ie" Chittagong 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton „ 31 ss " Olivebank " Townsville 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton May 25 ss " Orama " Australia 5 Pass Proceeded home Nov 17 ss "Mongolia" Brisbane 1 Crew Admitted to Port Sanitary Hospital, Denton — (4 Crew) T otal 10 (6 Passenge: rs) (b) Died, Landed elsewhere or well on Arrival— Feb 10 ss " Strathaird " Brisbane 2 Crew Well on arrival April 13 ss "Corfu" Yokohama 1 Pass Convalescent on arrival May 25 ss "Orama" Australia 1 Crew : Recovered 1 Pass Recovered 2 Pass „ Landed at Southampton June 22 ss " Baradine " Brisbane 1 Pass Landed at Plymouth Aug 16 ss " Neuralia " Oslo 1 Pass ] Landed at Oslo Nov 6 ss " Aurania " Montreal 1 Crew Wellon arrival „ 16 ss " Llandovery Cai 3tle " East London 1 Pass Landed at Southampton — (4 Crew) Total 11 (7 Passengers) 82 APPENDIX XX—Miscellaneous Diseases (Classified) Landed from Vessels Died, Landed elsewhere or Well on arrival Landed from Vessels Died, Landed elsewhere or Well on arrival OTHEB INFECTIOUS DISEASES DISEASES OF THE RESPIRATORY SYSTEM Whooping Cough 2 P 6 P Pleurisy 6 C, 2 P - Undulant Fever 3 P — Bronchitis 1 C 9 P (l'died) Parotitis 1 P — Haemoptysis — 1 C TROPICAL DISEASES Bronchiestasis - 1 P Abscess of Liver 2 C — Fibrosis of Lungs 2 P 1 P Beri-Beri 1 C 1 C DISEASES OF THE DIGESTIVE SYSTEM Dengue Fever — 2 0 Kala Azar 1C — Sprue 1 P — Appendicitis 1 P, 1 C 2 0 Malaria (Debility) 1 c Gastritis 1 P 1 C Ankvlostomiasis 1 p Diarrhoea 1 C 6 C CATARRHAL DISEASES Jaundice — 1C,1P Enteritis 1 C 1 P, 2 C Tonsillitis 3 C, 1 Res 4 C,22 P Colitis 1 c 1 C Epithelioma of Lip 10 — Laryngitis 1 C Hepatic Abscess — 1 C RHEUMATIC CONDITIONS Gastro-Enteritis 2 C, 1 P 200 P Rheumatism 3 C, 1 P — Dyspepsia - 1 C Vincent's Angina - 1 p SEPTIC CONDITIONS Carcinoma of Stomach - 1 p Cancer of Intestine - 1 C Septicaemia — 1 P (died) Carcinoma of Rectum 1 c — Dental Abscess 1 C — DISEASES OF THE GENITO-URINARY SYSTEM Sepsis 1 c — Axillary Adenitis — 1 C Perianal Abscess 1 c Furunculosis 1 c — Renal Calculus 1 c Septic Foot 1 c — Cystitis 1 p — NERVOUS AND MENTAL DISORDERS Nephritis — 1 c Ureemia — 1 p Insanity 2 0 9 P INJURIES Hemiplegia 3 C — Mental Debility 1 C — Acute Mania — 1 P Injury 2 0 3 C Mental Case 1 c — DISEASES OF THE EAR Nil Delusional Insanity 1 p Dementia Prsecox 2 P — Myelitis 1 P — -Cerebral Thrombosis 1 C — Apoplexy — 1 C DISEASES OF THE EYE Polio-myelitis 1 P — •Cerebral Abscess 1 C (died) Glaucoma 1 P — Paranoia 1 P Trachoma 1 C Polyneuritis 1 P Paraplegia — 1 C DISEASES OF BC )NES AND JOINTS DISEASES OF ? THE SKIN Synovitis Wrist 1 C — Scabies — 1 C OTHER DISEASES (not classified) Dermatitis 1 C — Impetigo — 1 c Suicide 1 P 4 P, 5 0 Prickly Heat — 1 c Uterine Hasmorrhage 2 P — DISEASES OF THE CIRCULATORY SYSTEM Pyrexia 1 C, 1 P 2 C, 1 P Effects of Heat 1 C Heart Disease — 3 P, 4 C Cramp 1 C — Cerebral Haemorrhage — 4 C, 2 P Accidental Death — 2 C (1 died) Food Poisoning — 1 P Cardiac Failure 1 P 4 P, 3 C Unknown 1 P (died) — Angina Pectoris — 1 P Diabetes —• 1 P Malignant Endocarditis 1 P — Chill — 1 C Lymphadenoma 1 c Marasmus Senilis 1 P 88 APPENDIX XXI.—Venereal Diseases. Number of Crew. Cases reportedPassengers. Syphilis 42 13 Gonorrhoea 168 18 Soft Sore 4 Climatic Bubo 37 2 251 33 Total, 284 APPENDIX XXII.-Hospital Number of Cases Admitted, Cost of Maintenance, &c. Patients remaining in Hospital on 81st December, 1932 Nil. Admitted Discharged. Died. Remaining under treatment. Chicken-pox 7 7 — — Diphtheria 4 4 — — Enteric Fever 6 6 — — Measles and German Measles 3 3 — — Mumps 4 4 — — Scarlet Fever 15 15 — — Other Diseases 14 13 — 1 Total 53 52 — 1 Remaining in Hospital on 31st December, 1933 1 Total number of days' treatment during the year 997 Average number of days' treatment for each case 18.8 Average daily number of patients in Hospital 2.7 Average daily cost of maintenance per patient 1s. O¾d. Average total cost of maintenance per patient £1 0s. 3¾d. 84 APPENDIX XXIII— Return of Rats Caught and Destroyed during 1933. The entire cost of destroying these rats has been borne by the Shipowners and Port of London Authority. Jan. Feb. Mar. April. May. June. July. Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Total. Millwall Dock— Warehouses 37 36 33 43 57 35 56 39 57 124 99 104 725 Vessels while in dock 78 13 — 38 45 103 150 83 19 270 41 48 886 Surrey Commercial Dock— Warehouses . 45 33 34 67 41 43 47 21 16 29 17 34 427 Vessels while in dock 51 86 1 8 73 — 20 — 43 57 13 2 354 Regent's Canal Dock— Warehouses 19 36 26 38 28 31 31 32 27 23 26 33 350 Vessels while in dock 31 6 — — — 2 — — — — — i 40 St. Katharine's Dock— Warehouses 108 67 64 80 65 60 69 72 96 121 107 135 1,044 Vessels while in dock — — — — — — — — — — — — — London Dock— Warehouses 66 50 33 72 73 46 82 44 35 71 54 46 672 Vessels while in dock — 10 — 7 — — — 1 — 1 2 21 Royal Albert Dock— Warehouses 13 16 4 2 2 — 20 5 6 22 12 7 107 Vessels while in dock 6 58 9 29 8 293 103 23 — 2 — — 531 Royal Victoria Dock— Warehouses 35 38 36 46 58 46 73 17 67 62 66 66 610 Vessels while in dock 23 26 34 16 4 11 29 18 2 59 31 182 435 King George V. Dock- Warehouses — — 5 1 — — 6 1 9 6 5 6 39 Vessels while in dock 9 3 72 14 — 7 14 — 15 — — — 134 West India Dock— Warehouses 7 19 10 24 72 36 37 60 88 63 68 35 519 Vessels while in dock 206 31 — 7 27 34 9 17 3 121 23 73 551 East India Dock— Warehouses 5 15 12 20 17 36 14 1 20 18 46 34 238 Vessels while in dock 34 7 6 4 13 37 - 19 26 4 11 38 199 Tilbury Dock— J Warehouses 17 8 12 25 14 22 9 11 21 21 8 10 178 Vessels while in dock 28 1 16 68 14 11 - - 10 - 4 32 184 River— While in River 44 - 2 69 79 41 226 11 66 2 32 572 Totals 862 549 424 669 697 894 995 474 627 1,075 632 920 8,818 Total from 1st January to 31st December, 1933:— In Dock Warehouses 4,911 On Vessels while in Dock and River ... ... ... ... ... 3,907 Total 8,818 85 APPENDIX XXIV. BACTERIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION OF RATS DURING 1933. Source. Total Examined. Black Rats. Brown Rats. Species Unknown. Mice. Rats Infected with Plague. Found Dead. Trapped Poisoned, &c. Found Dead. Trapped, Poisoned, &c. Found Dead. Trapped, Poisoned, &c. Found Dead. Trapped. Poisoned, &c. Vessels 650 4 623 23 Nil. London Dock 205 — 38 10 157 - - - - Nil. St. Katharine Dock 365 — 169 1 195 - - - - Nil. Regent's Canal Dock 19 — — 1 18 - - - - Nil. Surrey Commercial Dock 74 1 17 2 54 - - — - Nil. Poplar Dock - - - - - - - - - Nil. West India Dock 80 — 11 1 68 - - - - Nil South West India Dock 120 — 35 — 85 - — — - Nil. East India Dock 48 — 42 — 6 - - - — Nil. Royal Victoria Dock 76 — 24 — 52 - - . — - Nil. Royal Albert Dock 30 — 1 — 29 - - — - Nil. King George V. Dock 21 — — 21 - - - Nil. Tilbury Dock 15 — 12 — 3 - - - — Nil. Millwall Dock 324 — 20 — 304 - - - - Nil. Totals 2,027 5 992 15 1,015 — — — — Nil. APPENDIX XXV. INTERNATIONAL SANITARY CONVENTION. Deratisation Certificates. The number issued during the period covered by this Report was 136 :— Date. 1938. Name of Vessel. Reason for Deratisation. Action taken. No. of Rats reported found deac after Fumigation or Trapping Jan. 4 ss. " Stuart Star " Owner's request for Certificate. Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 4 ss. " Castilian " Rat Infested. Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 45 „ 6 ss. " El Argentino " Owner's request for Certificate: ,, 6 „ 7 ss. " Orontes " ,, Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 8 ss. " Malda " ,, ,, Nil. „ 10 ss. " Nestlea " Rat Infested. Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 120 „ 13 ss. " Orford " Owner's request for Certificate. Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 15 ss " Mamari " J? Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 9 „ 18 ss. " Ascania " Rat Infested. 38 „ 19 ss. " Jamaica Pioneer " Owner's request for Certificate. Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. 21 „ 28 ss. " Llanstephan Castle " Rat Infestation ,, 41 Fum. 12 Trap. Feb. 3 ss " Upwey Grange " Owner's request for Certificate. Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. „ 4 ss " Rangitane " ,, Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 4 ss "Mardinian " Evidence of Mice. Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 103 Mice) „ 4 ss " Beaverford " Owner's request for Certificate. Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. 36 „ 5 ss " David Livingstone " Nil. 7 ss. " Bayard " Rat Infestation. Trapping 13 „ 7 ss. " City of Canberra " ,, Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 38 86 Deratisation Certi „cates—continued. Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Reason for Deratisation. Action taken. No. of Rats reported found dead a „er Fumigation or Trapping. Feb. 11 ss. " Somerset " Owners request for Certi „cate. Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. „ 15 ss. " Minerva " Rat Infestation. „ 23 „ 16 ss. " Erin " Owners request for Certi „cate. Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 18 ss. " Marquesa " „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. „ 25 ss. " Port Brisbane " „ „ Nil. „ 25 ss. " Buahine " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 27 ss. " Mashobra " „ „ (3 Mice) Mar. 11 ss. " Beaver burn " „ „ (598 Mice) „ 21 ss. " Ionic " Rat Infested Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide and Trapping. 38 Fum. 18 Trap. „ 22 ss. Princesa " Owners request for Certi „cate. Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. „ 25 ss. " Port Fairy " „ „ Nil. „ 25 ss. " Wien " Rat Infested. „ Sailed before count could be made. „ 30 ss. " Leighton " Owners request for Certi „cate. Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 31 ss. " Hardwicke Grange " „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 4 „ 31 ss. " Huntsman " Owners request for Certi „cate. Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 10 April 1 ss. " Corner Brook " „ „ Nil. 1 ss. " Beaverdale " Rat Infested. Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. 62 „ 1 ss. " Beaverbrae " Owners request for 2 „ 3 ss. " Bajamar " Certi „cate. Fumigated with Sulphur (27 Mice) 36 „ 3 ss. " Tairoa " „ Dioxide. „ (22 Mice) 23 „ 3 ss. " Remuera " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 8 ss. " Beaverhill" „ „ (78 Mice) „ 8 ss. " Port Wellington " „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. „ 14 ss. " Historian " „ „ 12 „ 22 ss. " Aurania " Evidence of Mice. Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. (62 Mice) „ 28 ss. " Canonesa " Owners request for Certi „cate. Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 2 „ 29 ss. " Duquesa " „ „ Nil. „ 30 ss. " Rotorua " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. 4 May 1 ss. " Banaderos " Rat Infested. Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 78 (2 Mice) „ 5 ss. " Northmoor " Owners request for Certi „cate. „ Nil. „ 6 ss. " Turakina " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 10 ss. " Jamaica Producer " „ „ 2 „ 12 ss. Rangitiki " „ Nil. „ 12 ss. Marquesa " „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. „ 18 ss. " Cambridge " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 18 ss. " Port Hobart " " Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. „ 20 ss. " Nigaristan " „ „ 18 „ 27 ss. " Port Dunedin " „ „ Nil. June 3 ss. " Dunluce Castle " Rat Infested. Fumigated with Hydrogen 27 Fum. Cyanide and Trapping. 8 Trap. „ 4 ss. " Jamaica Progress " Owners request for Certi „cate. Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. 33 „ 8 ss. Rang „ane " „ „ Nil. „ 9 ss. Dunster Grange " „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 6 87 Deratisation Certificates—continued. Date. 1983. Name of Vessel. Reason for Deratisation, Action taken. No. of Rats reported found dead after Fumigation or Trapping. June 10 ss. " Port Campbell" Owner's request for Certificate. Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. „ 17 ss. " Port Fremantle " i i a Nil. „ 19 ss. " Shahristan " Rat Infested. a 22 „ 24 ss. " Ernani " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. 287 „ 24 ss. " Port Hardy " Owner's request for Certificate. Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. „ 24 ss. " Bulgarian " „ „ 21 „ 23 ss. " Bendigo " „ 7 „ 30 ss. " Andrea " Rat Infested. Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. 115 July 3 ss. " Durenda " „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 22 „ 7 m\ . " El Argentino " Owner's request for Certificate. Nil. ,, 8 ss. " Port Auckland " „ „ Nil. „ 8 ss. " Rangitata " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. ,, 9 ss. " Jamaica Merchant " „ „ 2 „ 10 ss. " Serenitas " » Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 55 ,, 14 ss. " Taranaki " Rat Infested. 21 by umigation. 13 by tapping. „ 16 ss. " Ruahine " Owner's request for Certificate. Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 21 ss. " Duquesa " „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 14 ,, 22 ss. " Orari " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 25 ss. " Linnell" „ „ Nil. „ 28 ss. " Shelley " Rat Infested. „ 171 „ 29 ss. " Port Hunter " Owner's request for Certificate. Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. ,, 29 ss. " Virginia " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 30 ss. " King John " „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 18 Aug. 2 ss. " Erin " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. 3 „ 5 ss. " Hobson's Bay " „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 11 „ 6 ss. " Harpalion " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 12 ss. " Remuera " „ Nil. „ 12 ss. " Llanstephan Castle " Rat Infested. Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. by f bj 8 umigation. 7 trapping. „ 15 ss. " Theomitor " Owner's request for Certificate. „ 5 ,, 15 ss. " Radames " „ „ 23 „ 16 ss. " Jamaica Settler " „ „ 5 „ 18 mv . " Upwey Grange " „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 6 „ 23 ss. " Jamaica Planter " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 25 ss. " Port Caroline " „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. „ 26 ss. " Borodino " „ „ Nil. „ 26 ss. " Malda " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 28 ss. " Rotorua " a „ Nil. Sept. 9 ss. " Port Huon " " Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. „ 14 ss. " Bajamar " a fi 31 (8 mice) 88 Deratisation Exemption Certificates.—The number issued during the year was 891. Deratisation Certificates—continued. Date. 1933. Name of Vessel. Reason for Deratisation. Action taken. No. of Rats reported found dead after Fumigation or Trapping. Sept. 14 my . " Rangitiki" Owner's request for Certificate. Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. ,, 16 ss. " Baronesa " „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. „ 22 ss. " Esperance Bay " „ „ 15 „ 23 ss. " Port Gisborne " „ „ Nil. „ 27 ss. " Frank " Infested with Mice. „ 96 Mice. „ 27 sv. " Parma " Owner's request for Certificate. „ 1 „ 28 ss. " Surrey " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 28 ss. " Port Dunedin " Owner's request for Certificate. Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. „ 28 mv . " Oakbank " Rat Infested. Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Vessel sailed before ,, 30 ss. " Samaria " Owner's request for Certificate. „ count made. Nil. Oct. 6 ss. " Orsova " „ „ Nil. ,, 8 ss. " Tuscan Star " „ „ Nil. ,, 11 mv . " Rangitane " „ „ Nil. „ 14 ss. " Oronsay " „ „ Nil. „ 14 sv. " Mozart " Rat Infested. Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 85 „ 20 ss. " Perseo " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. 210 „ 21 ss. " Canonesa " Owner's request for Certificate. Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 2 „ 22 ss. " Sultan Star " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. Nov. 4 ss. " Moreton Bay " „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. „ 4 ss. " Orama " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. 1 „ 10 mv "Rangitata" „ „ Nil. „ 20 ss. " Port Napier " „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. „ 22 ss. " Kent" „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 24 mv " Hardwicke Grange " „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. „ 30 ss. " Eirini N. Rallia " Rat Infested. Fumigated with Hydrogen Cvanide. 25 ,, 30 ss. " Lawhill" „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 23 Dec. 1 ss. " Ormonde " Owner's request for Certificate. Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 4 ss. " Avelona Star " „ „ Nil. „ 5 ss. " Marquesa " „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. Nil. ,, 6 ss. " Port Victor " „ „ Nil. ,, 6 ss. " Port Pirie " „ „ Nil. „ 9 ss. " Remuera " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. „ 15 ss. " Federiko Glavic " Rat Infested. „ 160 „ 16 ss. " Dunluce Castle " Three holds Rat Infested. „ 3 by fumigation. „ 21 ss. " Jamaica Progress " Owner's request for Certificate. „ 22 by trapping. 23 „ 29 ss. " Brenas " „ Fumigated with Sulphur Dioxide. 29 „ 29 ss. " Otranto " „ Fumigated with Hydrogen Cyanide. Nil. 89 APPENDIX XXYI.—General Summary, and Analysis, of the Sanitary Inspections of Vessels, &c., in the Port of London for the year ended 31st December, 1933. Foreign. Coastwise. Inland Navigation. Shore Premises. SickSeamenreferred toHospital Water Barges. Steam. Sail. Steam. Sail S eai n. Sail Lighter (Unihabited) Can alBc >ats Inspected. Defective. To be Cleaned. j Inspected. Defective. To be Cleaned, j Inspected. Defective. To be Cleaned. Inspected. Defective. To be Cleaned. Inspected. Defective. To be Cleaned. Inspected. Defective. To be Cleaned. Inspected. Defective. To be Cleaned. ! Inspected. Defective. To be Cleaned. Inspected. Defective. To bo Cleaned. No. in District in good condition 31st December, 1932. New Barges. Condemned. Use discontinued. Previously withdrawn and since resumed work. No. in District 31st December, 1933.] 11,881 | 207 1,874 144 .15 3 1 1,535 85 323 229 35 10 209 2 4 584 I 10 6 594 4 43 205 16 -1 1 6,169 i 563 860 376 13 1 L 1 — | 12 1 Inspections. Docks and River. No. Nationalities. No. Total Inspections from 1st January to 31st St. Katharine 194 Austrian 4 London 1,117 American 231 December, 1933:— Brazilian 1 Foreign 12,025 Regent's Canal 379 BRITISH 9,860 Belgian 137 Coastwise 1,764 Millwall 1,044 Dutch 1,171 West India 939 Danish 414 Inland Navigation . 1,592 Danzig Free State 6 Premises on shore 6,169 Poplar 117 Estonian 64 East India 426 French 101 Total 21,550 Finnish 439 Victoria 1,231 German 662 Cleansing of Crew's Quarters, &c.:— Royal Albert 1,176 Greek 90 Italian 127 King George V 979 Icelandic 3 Japanese 155 Total No. of Vessels from 1st January to 31st December, 1933 2,263 Surrey Commercial 1,783 Latvian 77 1,495 Tilbury 1,046 Polish 43 Gravesend District — Portuguese 72 Russian 116 Number of Vessels inspected:— In the Launches— River—*Upper District 1,440 Roumanian 23 „ *Middle ,, 1,498 Spanish 12 Yugo-Slavakian 20 Lower „ 2,012 Egyptian 12 2,012 Lithuanian 1 „ Medway ) Panama 41 " Howard Deighton " Peruvian 4 " James Howell" 2,938 Total Vessels 15,381 15,381 Shore Premises 6,169 Shore Premises 6,169 Total 4,950 Total 21,550 Total 21,550 In the Docks, &c. j 6,600 Total 521,550 *Upper District extends from Greenwich to Teddington. *Middle „ „ ,, „ Erith. *Lower „ „ „ Erith to outer limits of the Port of London. 1924. 1925. 1926 1927. 1928. 1929. 1930. 193 1. 1932. 1933. Y early Average for the 10 years ending 31st j Dec., 1933. Total number of Inspections of vessels from— • "Foreign" 13,634 12,187 12,23 9 11,806 12,345 12,186 12,489 11,C 71 11,090 12,025 12,107*2 " Coastwise," " Inland Navigation," and other Inspections 10,133 11,397 10,21 5 11,427 9,947 8,880 8,613 9,429 29 9,883 9,525 9,944.9 Total 23,767 23,584 22,45 4 23,233 22,292 2 1,06 21,102 20,500 20,973 21,550 22,052.1 90 APPENDIX XXVII. NUMBER OF NUISANCES ON VESSELS REPORTED AND DEALT WITH during the year ended 31st December, 1933. DESCRIPTION OF NUISANCES. January. February. March. April. May. June. July. August. September. October. November. December. Totals. Smoke Nuisances :— Number of complaints received — 4 6 2 4 3 2 2 23 Number of recurrences reported Offensive Cargoes (Bye-laws):— Number of Infringements reported — — 1 2 — — — - — — 3 6 Structural and other Defects:— Ventilation 3 6 5 3 3 6 1 2 6 4 3 2 44 Lighting 5 9 8 4 4 9 4 4 11 10 13 7 88 Heating 15 9 10 8 8 4 1 — 13 13 14 12 107 Bare iron in crew's quarters — 1 2 — — — — — — 2 — — 5 Leaky decks, hawse-pipes, cable casings, &c 13 13 11 4 2 10 7 2 14 17 10 7 110 Defective bulkheads and floors 4 7 14 9 15 4 2 3 17 17 4 2 98 Sanitary conveniences 3 1 7 4 8 8 3 2 3 10 3 4 56 Ship's gear or stores stowed in crew's quarters 2 — 1 2 1 - - - - - 1 — 7 Foul bilges and peaks Storage of drinking water (dirty or defective tanks) 1 — 2 2 1 2 1 — 8 1 1 — 19 Dirty quarters 180 200 189 147 205 241 179 154 176 202 164 193 2,230 Verminous quarters 2 1 3 2 1 2 4 2 6 7 2 — 32 Accumulation of offensive matter 5 2 — 1 2 1 — 1 3 7 — 1 23 Miscellaneous Nuisances 1 5 5 5 3 — 5 1 14 8 18 1 66 Totals 234 258 263 194 259 290 209 171 271 300 233 232 2,194 Total number of vessels on which sanitary defects were reported 209 231 224 207 237 265 198 169 208 263 191 235 2,637 Total number of vessels on which sanitary defects were remedie 190 220 198 194 222 255 193 164 201 249 185 217 2,488 (Includes Orders made in previous years and reported carried out during 1983.) NUMBER OF NUISANCES IN THE RIVER REPORTED AND DEALT WITH during the year ended 31st December, 1933. Offensive accumulation on Foreshore - - - - - - - - - - - - nil. Totals - - - - - - - - - - - - nil. 91 APPENDIX XXVIII. NUMBEE OP NUISANCES ON SHORE PREMISES REPORTED AND DEALT WITH during the year ended 31st December, 1933. Description of nuisances. January. February. March. April. May. June. July. August. September. October. November. December. Totals. Smoke Nuisances :— Number of complaints received - - - - - - - - - - - — — Number of recurrences reported - - - - - - - - - - - — — Structural and other Defects :— Ventilation - - - - - - - - - - - — — Lighting — 2 - - - - - - - - - - 2 Heating - - - - - - - - - - - 1 1 Dilapidations 1 9 2 1 1 — 1 — — 3 — 2 20 Sanitary Conveniences 1 2 — 3 1 1 — 1 — 1 3 6 19 Water Supply ... — - — - - — - — — — - -—. — Dirty Premises 86 80 76 79 78 78 64 40 63 63 73 80 860 Accumulation of Offensive Matter 1 — — — 2 1 1 — 1 1 1 — 8 Drainage 1 4 2 1 — — 1 — — 2 3 1 15 Foul Cesspits, Latrines, &c. — — — — — — — — — — — — — Miscellaneous Nuisances 1 — — — 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 — 10 Totals 91 97 80 84 83 83 68 42 65 71 81 90 935 Number of shore premises on which sanitary defects were reported 91 88 79 83 83 83 68 42 65 69 79 85 913 Number of shore premises on which sanitary defects were remedied 91 84 79 81 83 83 66 41 64 67 78 81 898 APPENDIX XXIX.—Description of Meat Destroyed. Year. Beef. Mutton and Lamb. Veal, Pork, Offal. Tinned. Smoked and Salted, &c Total. Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Tons. cwts. qrs. Iba. Tons, c wts. qrs. lbs. Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. 1924 141 8 2 17 13 11 1 Pork and Veal— j 0 16 0 15 0 3 0 7 183 8 2 0 0 9 2 19 Offal— 26 19 2 21 1925 61 19 2 7 6 1 3 Pork and Veal— 1 15 1 6 0 9 0 9 109 4 2 24 4 2 0 18 Offal— 31 16 2 27 Pork and Veal— 0 16 1 3 1926 51 10 3 25 41 19 3 26 Offal— r i 8 0 16 0 1 1 0 135 13 2 20 37 2 0 6 Pork and Veal— 3 9 2 8 1927 311 12 0 2 263 4 1 13 Offal— f o 2 0 6 Nil. 605 12 2 16 27 4 2 15 Pork and Veal— 0 6 1 22 1928 7 1 0 3 155 18 3 6 Offal— f 0 0 1 26 4 17 2 13 184 6 1 13 e- 16 1 o 27 Pork and Veal— 0 13 2 12 1929 8 17 3 4 367 12 1 8 Offal— Nil 0 15 3 27 391 16 3 27 13 17 1 4 Pork and Veal— 1 10 0 25 1930 21 12 0 16 52 18 0 01 21 Uiial— 1 0 4 1 27 1 0 2 27 95 17 2 4 18 11 3 0 Pork and Veal— 1 9, n 1K 1931 1 14 1 16 65 4 2 24 Offal— 0 1 2 19 0 10 2 20 81 12 3 22 12 19 1 12 Pork and Veal— 0 6 2 16 1932 3 19 3 15 56 8 b 9 ] Offal— 1 1 3 3 22 0 2 2 19 72 6 3 12 10 4 3 15 Pork and Veal— 1 10 2 8 1933 2 19 1 7 18 3 0 13 Offal— 0 0 2 19 0 1 1 3 28 18 3 3 6 3 3 9 Total for ten years 615 15 0 0 1,044 3 1 26 215 9 2 2 5 7 3 16 8 2 1 18 1,888 18 1 1 93 APPENDIX XXX.—New Buildings and Sanitary Works. Date Plans Date work reported submitted. Works. as completed. ROYAL ALBERT DOCK— 1933. 24th May. A one pedestal water-closet, one urinal and two lavatory basins at Customs Office, No. 6, North side July, 1933. SOUTH WEST INDIA DOCK— A new Dock Office constructed of wood and corrugated iron on a concrete base with one lavatory and a toilet room at Blackwall entrance, South of "C " Warehouse July, 1933. SURREY COMMERCIAL DOCK— A new 3-st.all urinal at rear of Port of London Authority Social Club, main entrance 29th April, 1933. Three new drains and one pedestal water-closet to dwelling-house at West Gate Lodge 22nd August, 1933. A 3-stall urinal, one pedestal water-closet, two wash basins and a shower-bath to the Gymnasium at Port of London Authority Social Club, main entrance 29th August, 1933. TILBURY DOCK— 8th April. One pedestal water-closet and wash basin at new , Customs Office between Nos. 14 and 15 sheds, Orient Line Berth 29th April, 1933. 9th November. Reconstruction of flooring and drainage and renewal of old 5-in. water service main at No. 1 Shed for use as a cattle shed December, 1933. November. REGENT'S CANAL DOCK— Drainage and new convenience at Customs Office, Mill Place - Drainage to Port of London Authority new Office at East Quay - APPENDIX XXXI. DOCKS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OP THE PORT OF LONDON SANITARY AUTHORITY. Water Area. Lineal Quayage. Docks. Acres. Yards. Miles. Yards Regent's Canal 11 38 — 966 St. Katharine 10 488 — 1,654 London 34 4,460 3 119 Surrey Commercial 161 2,717 16 200 West India 97 3,957 4 1,134 East India 31 2,878 1 1,242 Millwall 35 3,217 2 155 Royal Victoria 95 1,772 5 1,479 Royal Albert 87 213 3 905 King George V 64 997 3 663 Tilbury 104 2,166 3 1,667 The River distance between the Western and Eastern limits of the Port is about 68|- miles. 94 APPENDIX XXXII. POWERS. The work of the Port of London Sanitary Authority is carried out under the following Acts of Parliament and Statutory Rules and Orders :— Existing Acts and Orders applicable to the Port of London Sanitary Authority. CONSTITUTION OF THE AUTHORITY. Public Health (London) Act, 1891. ASSIGNMENT OF POWERS. L.G.B. Order, Port Sanitary Authority Assignment of Powers, Port of London 25th March, 1892. L.G.B. Order, Port Sanitary Authority Assignment of Farther Powers. Port of London 29th December, 1894. L.G.B. Order, Port Sanitary Authority Assignment of Powers, Port of London 30th June, 1898 S.R. & 0. 1922, No. 781. London Port Sanitary (Additional Powers) Order, 1922 18th July 1922. S.R. & 0. 1923, No. 812. London Port Sanitary (Additional Powers) Order. 1923 '. 16th July, 1923. S.R. & 0, 1933, No. 803. The Port of London (Assignment of Powers) Order, 1933 11th August, 1933. ADMINISTRATION. Port Sanitary Administration and Medical Inspection of Aliens under the Aliens Order, 1920 (Grants in Aid) 14th July, 1920. Public Health (Officers) Act, 1921. City of London (Various Powers) Act, 1922. City of London (Various Powers) Act, 1933. S.R & 0. 1926, No. 552. Sanitary Officers Order, 1926 27th May. 1926. INFECTIOUS DISEASE. Lifectious Disease (Notification) Acts, 1889 to 1899. Public Health Act, 1896. Public Health (Ports) Act, 1896. L.G.B. Order. Prevention of Epidemic Diseases Regulations as to Plague, Destruction of Rats, 1910 10th November, 1910. S.R & 0. 1912, No. 1226 Public Health ( Cerebro-spinal Fever and Acute Poliomyelitis) Regulations, 1912 15th August, 1912. S.R. & 0. 1918, No. 67. Public Health (Notification of Infectious Diseases) Regulations, 1918 19th January, 1918. S.R. & 0. 1926, No. 972. Public Health (Notification of Puerperal Fever and Puerperal Pyrexia) Regulations, 1926 31st July, 1926. S.R. & 0. 1927, No. 1207. Infectious Diseases (London) Regulations, 1927. 22nd December, 1927. S.R. & 0. 1930, No. 299. Parrots (Prohibition of Import) Regulations, 1930 24th April, 1930. S.R. & 0. 1933, No. 38. The Port Sanitary Regulations, 1933 4th February, 1933. CANAL BOATS Canal Boats Acts, 1877 and 1884. L.G.B. Order. Canal Boats Regulations 20th March, 1878. L.G.B. Order, Canal Boats (Registration Authorities) Order 7th June, 1887. L.G.B. Order, Canal Boats (Sale of Regulations) Order 26th July, 1887. S.R. & 0. 1923, No. 451. The Canal Boats Order, 1922 10th July, 1922. S.R. & 0. 1925, No. 843. Canal Boats (Amendment) Regulations, 1925 9th June, 1925. S.R. & 0. 1931, No. 444. Canal Boats (Amendment) Regulations, 1931 26th May, 1931. 95 FOOD. Public Health (Regulations as to Food) Act, 1907. S.R. & 0.1924, No. 1432. Public Health (Meat) Regulations, 1924 (Part IV.) 20th December, 1924. S.R. & 0.1925, No. 775 1926, No. 1577 Public Health (Preservatives, &c., in Food) ' Regulations 1928. 1927, No. 577 S.R. & 0. 1925, No. 273. Public Health (Imported Food) Regulations, 1925 23rd March, 1925. S.R. & 0. 1933, No. 347. Public Health (Imported Food) Amendment Regulations, 1933 25th April, 1933. S.R. & 0. 1926, No. 820. Public Health (Imported Milk) Regulations, 1926 6th July, 1926. SHELLFISH. S.R. & 0. 1915, No. 125. Public Health (Shellfish) Regulations, 1915 ... 16th February, 1915. RATS AND MICE. Rats and Mice (Destruction) Act, 1919. SMOKE ABATEMENT. Public Health (Smoke Abatement) Act, 1926. ABATEMENT OF NUISANCES and REMOVAL OF REFUSE. Public Health (London) Act, 1891. FERTILISERS AND FEEDING STUFFS. Fertilisers and Feeding Stuffs Act, 1926. S.R. & 0.1928, No. 421. Fertilisers and Feeding Stuffs Regulations, 1928 ... 23rd May, 1928. S.R. & 0. 1928, No. 439. Order appointing 1st July, 1928, as the date for the coming into operation of the Fertilisers and Feeding Stuffs Act, 1926 30th May, 1928. DANGEROUS DRUGS. S.R. & 0. 1923, No. 1095. Dangerous Drugs (No. 3) Regulations, 1923 ... 10thSeptember, 1923. ALIENS. S.R. & 0. 1920, No. 448. The Aliens Order, 1920. IMPORTATION OF CATTLE. Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Animals (Importation) Order, 1930, dated 4th November, 1930. Part IIT, Article 22 ; Part IV, Articles 23, 24 and 25. Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Animals (Landing from Ireland, Channel Islands and Isle of Man) Order, 1933, dated 17th January, 1933. Part II., Article 17. BYE-LAWS. Bye-laws have been made by the Port of London Sanitary Authority :— 1. For preventing nuisances arising from barges or vessels carrying offensive cargoes. 2. For removing to hospital any person suffering from dangerous infectious disorders, and for keeping therein of such persons as long as may be deemed necessary. 3. With respect to Houseboats used for human habitation within the limits of the Port of London. PORT OF LONDON SANITARY ADMINISTRATION ACCOUNT. Dr. REVENUE ACCOUNT for Year ended 31st March, 1934. Cr. £ s d. £ 8. d. £ 8. d. £ s. d. Salaries—Medical Officer, Deputy and Assistants 5,507 6 5 Contribution from General Rate . 11,457 7 3 Travelling Expenses—Ditto 48 2 9 Contribution from Ministry of Health . 12,221 4 7 Salaries—Inspectors . . . 4,554 15 2 Sundry Fees 65 11 9 Uniforms, Travelling Expenses—Inspectors 197 .6 5 Proceeds, Sale of Unsound Food . 157 10 5 Clerical Assistance :— Deratisation Receipts . 2,216 4 6 Salaries ... 2,120 19 7 Miscellaneous Receipts 0 2 0 Other Expenses 63 18 9 Rent re Mooring Launch 7 10 0 Assistant Rat Officers :— 2,184 18 4 Repayment by Hospital Patients 30 15 0 Salaries 1,039 10 3 Reimbursement of Damage to Launches 84 6 9 Other Expenses 96 11 8 Provision and Maintenance of Hospital :— 1,136 1 11 £26,240 2 3 Capital Expenditure 520 15 3 Balance to Balance Sheet .. 1,493 0 0 Rent, Rates, Taxes and Insurance 163 18 6 Furniture, Equipment and Renewals 105 12 8 Repairs ... 783 16 10 Heating, Lighting and Cleansing 308 15 2 Interest on Loans 219 11 1 Salaries—General Nursing 302 480 0 1 6 2 Domestic 85 19 4 928 1 0 Cost of Food 222 3 11 Drugs and Medical Requisites 34 5 2 Uniforms 26 6 6 Miscellaneous 96 15 1 Expenses of Launches :—- 3,410 1 2 Wages 3,702 12 0 Uniforms ... ... ... ... ... ... 85 9 4 Upkeep and Running Expenses 1,361 4 5 Capital Expenditure 1,288 15 5 Interest on Loans 291 11 2 6,732 12 4 Laboratory Facilities, Chemical and Bacteriological Examinations 310 1 9 Examination and Analysis of Food ... 174 8 3 Disinfections 107 1 10 Office Expenses :— Rent, Rates, Water, Taxes and Insurance ... 248 8 5 Furniture and Equipment 35 9 2 Repairs ... 24 17 6 Lighting, Heating and Cleansing 127 0 2 o o* © o Printing and Stationery 438 0 3 Postages, Telegrams, Telephones 239 6 8 — 1,113 2 2 Part Proceeds of Sale of Unsound Food returned to Consignee s ... 75 19 3 Expenses of Delegates to Congresses 96 19 9 Miscellaneous 13 15 0 Legal Expenses 18 16 9 National Insurance 81 1 10 Corporation's Contribution to Pension Funds 1,971 1 2 £ 27,734 2 3 £27,734 2 3 Chamber of London, 9th June, 1934.