The brief but very severe epidemic of cholera in the south of Scotland in midwinter was all over and done with for good before the disease really began in England. Hull, which had a few cases on board ship in the end of 1848, about the same time as the infection began to rage in Edinburgh and Leith, was spared its great visitation, the greatest in all England, until the late summer and autumn[1555]. The progress of the infection in London also was strangely different from that in Scotland. There were undoubted cases in Bethnal Green and other out-parishes in the autumn of 1848, and there seemed no reason why the infection should not run through the population and exhaust itself at once, as in Glasgow. But it will appear from the following table of the deaths in London that the real outburst was delayed until the summer and autumn of 1849:

Cholera
deaths
1848
Sept. 11
Oct. 122
Nov. 215
Dec. 131
1849
Jan. 262
Feb. 181
March 73
April 9
May 13
June 246
July 1952
Aug. 4251
Sept. 6644
Oct. 464
Nov. 27

Although a certain number of deaths were returned in October and November, 1848, they came in twos or threes from many parishes of the metropolis and made no great impression upon any one locality. It was not until the beginning of December that the presence of cholera was fully realized, owing to an extraordinary explosion of the disease in a huge pauper institution at Tooting. The school contained about a thousand children, of whom some three hundred took Asiatic cholera, with one hundred and eighty deaths, in the course of three or four weeks: this was the whole cholera mortality that the parish of Streatham had from first to last. In the spring months the cases declined all over London in a very remarkable way, so that it looked for a time as if the infection were extinct, just as in 1832. But in June there was a revival, and thereafter a steady increase to the maximum of 6644 deaths in September. The table given under the year 1866 shows upon what parishes the mortality fell most—those of Southwark, Bermondsey, Rotherhithe, Greenwich, Newington, Lambeth and Battersea on the south side, of Westminster, the City and Liberties, Shoreditch, Bethnal Green and Whitechapel on the north side of the Thames. It was a more severe visitation per head of the inhabitants than that of 1832, cutting off many beyond the limits of the destitute and reckless class who were its most usual victims on the first occasion. Many of the respectable class of workmen and small shopkeepers were among the victims. Several medical men died of it, including one well-known surgeon, Mr Aston Key, at his house in St Helen’s Place, Bishopsgate, on 23 August, after a few hours’ illness. As in Ireland, and at Dundee, an unusually large proportion of the London deaths, perhaps a fourth part, were from sudden collapse and blueness, without premonitory diarrhoea or predominant intestinal symptoms. Opinion was strongly against contagiousness in this epidemic. There were 478 cases treated in St Bartholomew’s Hospital, but not one of the nurses took cholera.

The infection seemed to find out the insanitary spots and to act miasmatically upon the residents. The common remark in all parts of England, Scotland and Ireland was that the localities that suffered most from the typhus fever of 1847-48 suffered most also from cholera. The one black spot in Kensington was a poor district on the north side of the parish known as the Potteries, where an immense number of pigs were kept.

One of the most remarkable features of the cholera-seasons of 1848-49 was the extensive prevalence of common bowel-complaints. Evidence of this has been given for the south of Scotland just before or during the cholera of midwinter, a season when diarrhoea is not usual. It was equally remarked in England in the course of 1849. In the Taunton workhouse, where true Asiatic cholera broke out in November, there had been many cases of bowel-complaint, as well as of fever, in the spring (7 deaths from dysentery and diarrhoea, 5 from fever). In the Exeter workhouse there were eighteen deaths from dysentery in the end of the year, although there is nothing said of cholera, which caused only 44 deaths in the whole city. The efforts of the inspectors sent by the Board of Health were in great part directed to finding out the cases of “premonitory” diarrhoea, by house-to-house visitation, and insisting upon the importance of checking it before it could turn to true cholera. Leeds will serve as an example of English towns. In an incomplete survey after the month of July there were found 5129 cases of simple diarrhoea, 1484 cases of dysentery, 1273 cases of choleraic diarrhoea, and 1090 cases of true cholera[1556]. It was something of a paradox that, with such excessive prevalence of ordinary bowel-complaints, an unusual proportion of the cases of true cholera proved quickly fatal with symptoms of collapse and asphyxia only.

Just as the first startling indication of the presence of Asiatic cholera in London was the enormous fatality in the pauper school at Tooting in the winter, so in some other towns the infection seemed to pick out workhouses or prisons to begin upon. At Belfast there were forty cases in the workhouse before there was one in the town. At Liverpool there were 28 cholera deaths in the first quarter of 1849, of which 8 were in the workhouse. At Wakefield, 19 died of cholera in January, 16 of these in the House of Correction. Among the people at large the infection made little progress until the summer. In the first and second quarters of the year it is heard of, but to a moderate extent, in the towns and colliery districts of Durham and Northumberland, which were the scene of its earliest outbreak in the winter of 1831-32. It was also beginning in the poorest and filthiest parts of Liverpool, Bristol and Plymouth. Its great season all over England was July, August and September, the incidence of the disease according to counties being shown in the table. The right-hand column, showing the number of deaths at the principal centres in each county, must serve for a conspectus of the epidemic.

Cholera Mortality in England and Wales in 1849.

Deaths Death-rate
per 1000
inhab.
Principal centres in each county
England and Wales 53293 3·0
London 14137 6·2 Lambeth 1618, Newington 907,
Bermondsey 734, Southwark 1704
Surrey, part of 255 1·3
Kent, part of 1208 2·5 Gravesend, Milton, Rochester, Chatham,
Margate, Ramsgate, Maidstone
Sussex 346 1·1 Hastings
Hampshire 1245 3·2 Portsmouth 568, Southampton 240
Berkshire 148 ·8
Middlesex 406 2·7 Edmonton, Barnet
Hertfordshire 323 1·9 Hitchin 127, Hertford 81, Watford 45
Buckinghamshire 175 1·2 Marlow, Wycombe 100
Oxfordshire 117 ·7 Oxford 44, Witney 33
Northamptonshire 141 ·7 Northampton 49, Peterborough 49
Huntingdonshire 14 ·2
Bedfordshire 72 ·6 Bedford 37, Biggleswade 28
Cambridgeshire 269 1·4 Wisbech 138, North Witchford 85
Essex 580 1·7 West Ham 134, Romford 163, Rochford
105, Harwich
Suffolk 79 ·2 Ipswich 18, Mutford 27
Norfolk 223 ·5 Yarmouth 87, Norwich 38
Wiltshire 320 1·3 Salisbury 165, Devizes 67
Dorset 122 ·7 Weymouth 59, Poole 31
Devon 2366 4·2 Plymouth 830, Stonehouse 171, Stoke
Damerel 721, Plympton St Mary 151,
Tavistock 140, Totnes 107
Cornwall 835 2·4 St Germans 236, Liskeard 132, St
Austell 135, Redruth 133
Somerset 923 2 Bridgewater 235, Keynsham 77, Bath
90, Bedminster 281
Gloucestershire 1465 3·5 Bristol 591, Tewkesbury 59,
Gloucester 119, Clifton 563,
Dursley 58
Herefordshire 1 ·01
Shropshire 316 1·3 Bridgnorth 75, Shrewsbury 116
Staffordshire 2672 4·4 Newcastle-under-Lyme 241,
Wolverhampton (incl. Bilston,
Tipton, Sedgley) 1365, Stoke 103,
W. Bromwich 250, Dudley 412,
Walsall 186
Worcestershire 432 1·7 Stourbridge 314
Warwickshire 293 ·6 Coventry 202, Birmingham 29,
Warwick 20
Leicestershire 8 ·08 Loughborough 7, Leicester 2
Rutlandshire 7 ·4
Lincolnshire 372 ·9 Gainsborough 246, Boston 35, Grimsby
29
Nottinghamshire 137 ·5 East Retford 21, Basford 42,
Nottingham 18
Derbyshire 50 ·06 Derby 18
Cheshire 653 1·6 Nantwich 181, Runcorn 82, Stockport
72, Birkenhead 139
Lancashire 8184 4·1 Liverpool and W. Derby 5308, Wigan
503, Manchester 878, Chorlton 280,
Salford 237
West Riding 4151 3·2 Huddersfield 52, Bradford 426, Hunslet
884, Dewsbury 224, Wakefield 241,
Pontefract &c. 238, Leeds 1439
East Riding 2140 8·7 Hull and Sculcoates 1834, York 174,
Pocklington 37, Howden 58
North Riding 47 ·2 Whitby 10
Durham 1642 4·2 Darlington 4, Stockton 248, Durham
192, Hartlepool, Chester-le-Street
134, Sunderland 363, Gateshead 257,
S. Shields 201
Northumberland 1417 4·8 Newcastle 295, Tynemouth 815, Alnwick
142
Cumberland 419 2·2 Carlisle 51, Cockermouth 282,
Whitehaven 79
Westmoreland 1 ·02
Monmouth 775 4·1 Newport 246, Pontypool 69, Abergavenny
438
S. Wales 3544 6·1 Merthyr Tydvil 1682, Cardiff 396,
Neath 738, Llanelly 45, Swansea 262,
Carmarthen 142, Crickhowell 95
N. Wales 245 ·6 Holywell 86, Montgomery 37, Carnarvon
21

The highest rates in the table are for the East Riding, owing to Hull (24·1), for South Wales, owing to Merthyr Tydvil (23·4), for Northumberland and Durham, for Staffordshire, owing to the iron district round Wolverhampton, for Devonshire, owing to Plymouth, for Lancashire, owing to Liverpool, and for Monmouth, owing to a few mining places. The miners suffered most, the lower class in the seaports next most severely. The Black Country in the south of Staffordshire, which had been the worst centre of the 1832 cholera, was again one of its chief centres in 1849, the mortality falling most, as before, upon the town of Bilston, and next to it upon Willenhall and Wolverhampton. But a great rival to the Staffordshire coal and iron mining had sprung up since 1832 in Glamorgan; and it was in this comparatively new region of miners that cholera in 1849 reproduced the Black Country horrors of 1832 and, indeed, surpassed them.

Merthyr Tydvil had sprung up more like a vast miners’ camp than like a well-ordered municipality. Along the eastern side of the Taff valley, on the slopes and in bottoms of the hills, but everywhere at an elevation of some four or five hundred feet above the level of Cardiff docks, were numerous groups of mean-looking miners’ cottages, with their attendant ale-houses, small retail shops, schools and meeting-houses. This peculiar township had drawn to itself the special notice of the Health of Towns Commission in 1844: “From the poorer inhabitants (who constitute the mass of the population) throwing all slops and refuse into the nearest open gutter before their houses, from the impeded course of such channels, and the scarcity of privies, some parts of the town are complete networks of filth emitting noxious exhalations.... During the rapid increase of the town no attention seems to have been paid to its drainage.”