I have collected the evidence of several master tailors on the effects of work in crowded or bad ventilated rooms. Some are inclined to ascribe more of the ill health to the habits of the journeymen in drinking at public-houses, and to the state of their private dwellings, but in the main results the loss of daily power—i. e., the loss of at least one-third the industrial capabilities enjoyed by men working under advantageous circumstances—the nervous exhaustion attendant on work in crowds, and the consequent temptation to resort continually to stimulants, which in their turn increase the exhaustion, are fully proved, and indeed generally admitted. I have caused the mortuary registers to be examined, but find that they do not distinguish the masters from the journeymen, and that there are no ready means of distinguishing those of the deceased who have been employed in the larger shops. It is also stated that many who come to work in town and become diseased, return and die in the villages. But in the registered causes of death of 233 persons entered during the year 1839 in the eastern and western Unions of the metropolis, under the general head “tailor,” no less than 123 are registered as having died of disease of the respiratory organs, of whom 92 died of consumption;[[13]] 16 of diseases of the nervous system, of whom 8 died of apoplexy; 16 of epidemic or contagious diseases, of whom 11 died of typhus; 23 are registered as having died of diseases of “uncertain seat,” of whom 13 fell victims of dropsy; 8 died of diseases of the digestive organs, and six of “heart disease;” and of the whole number of 233 only 29 of old age; and of these, if they could be traced, we may pronounce confidently that the greater proportion of them would be found to be not journeymen, of whom not two or three per cent. attain old age, but masters. On comparing the mortuary registers in the metropolis with the registers in north-western and the south-western parts of England, where we may expect a larger proportion of men working separately, I find that whilst 53 per cent. of the men die of diseases of the respiratory organs in the metropolis, only 39 per cent. die of these diseases in the remote districts; that whilst five per cent. die. of typhus in London, only one per cent. fall victims to it in the country; that whilst in London only 12 in the hundred attain old age, 25 in the hundred are registered as having attained it in the remote districts.
It is due to Messrs. Stultze, the employers mentioned by the first witness, to state, that since he worked with them they have made considerable alterations with the view to increase the ventilation of their workshops, and have expressed their desire to adopt whatever improvements may be pointed out to them.
I have been informed, that some tailors’ workshops at Glasgow have been carefully ventilated, and that the immediate results are as satisfactory as were anticipated, but the change has been too recent to permit any estimate of the effects on the general habits of the workmen.
The preceding case may serve as a general instance of the practical difference of the effects in the saving of suffering as well as of expense, by active benevolence exerted with foresight in measures of prevention, as compared with benevolence exerted in measures of alleviation of disease after it has occurred.
The subscriptions to the benevolent institution for the relief of the aged and infirm tailors, by individual masters in the metropolis, appear to be large and liberal, and amount to upwards of 11,000l.; yet it is to be observed, that if they or the men had been aware of the effects of vitiated atmospheres on the constitution and general strength, and of the means of ventilation, the practicable gain of money from the gain of labour by that sanitary measure could not have been less in one large shop, employing 200 men, than 100,000l. Independently of subscriptions of the whole trade, it would, during their working period of life, have been sufficient, with the enjoyment of greater health and comfort by every workman during the time of work, to have purchased him an annuity of 1l. per week for comfortable and respectable self-support during a period of superannuation, commencing soon after fifty years of age.
Of that which in these instances appear to be the main cause of premature disease and death, defective ventilation, it is to be remarked that until very lately little had been observed or understood, even by professional men or men of science; and that it is only when the public health is made a matter of public care by a responsible public agency that, what is understood can be expected to be generally and effectually applied for the public protection. Vitiated air not being seen, and air which is pure in winter being cold, the cold is felt and the air is excluded by the workmen. The great desideratum hitherto has been to obtain a circulation of air which was warm, as well as fresh. This desideratum has been attained, after much trial, in the House of Commons; but there is reason to believe that, by various means, at an expense within the reach certainly of large places of work, a ventilation equally good might be secured with mutual advantage.
The effects of bad ventilation, it need not be pointed out, are chiefly manifested in consumption, the disease by which the greatest slaughter is committed. The causes of fever are comparatively few and prominent, but they appear to have a concurrent effect in producing consumption. The investigation of the whole of the contributary causes to the production of the immense mass of mortality occasioned by that disease, would be beyond the time or means allowed for the present inquiry; but defective ventilation and defective management in respect to changes of temperature, are causes everywhere apparent amongst the labouring classes. The effects of good ventilation, as a single cause of the prevention or alleviation of disease, are nowhere so clearly manifest as in their effects on hospital treatment. What Dr. Bisset Hawkins states in respect to the sanitary measures necessary to ensure successful treatment in hospitals, may be stated in respect to common dwellings as well as places of work.
“Next to the influence of national causes, the mortality of hospitals is most affected by position and internal economy. These circumstances appear more powerful than even the various merits of practice; and, happily for mankind, they are advantages of a definite nature, easily comprehended, and, of late years, generally demanded. The case was formerly very different, when a singular prejudice or indifference existed in respect to ventilation. At the Leeds hospital no case of compound fracture, nor of trepan, survived. At the Hôtel Dieu, of Paris, compound fractures were also almost always fatal, and few survived amputation. The system which will bear improper air with impunity during health becomes keenly susceptible of its mischief when diseased, and a change of air will often restore where the strictest diet has failed. Mortality is seldom to be assigned to the influence of bad practice, which, probably, does not often destroy life. An accomplished friend made particular notes on the comparative mortality under three physicians in the same hospital; one was expectant, one tonic, and the other eclectic. The mortality was the same, but the length of the disorder, the character of the convalescence, and the chances of relapse were very different.
“The earliest statement which we possess of the mortality of our hospitals is in Sir William Petty’s work on Political Arithmetic, from which it appears, that in the year 1685 the proportion of the deaths to the cures in St. Bartholomew’s and St. Thomas’s hospitals was about 1 to 7. The annual printed report of St. Thomas’s hospital for 1689 is still preserved: the mortality was then about 1 in 10. During the ten years from 1773 to 1783, the mortality at St Thomas’s became still smaller, it was 1 in 14. About the year 1783, some improvements were made with respect to cleanliness and ventilation, and during the ten subsequent years the annual deaths were accordingly still fewer than before, less than 1 in 15. During the ten years intervening between 1803 and 1813 the improvement continued, and the proportion fell to only 1 in 16. The average during the 50 years from 1764 to 1813 was remarkably small, only 1 in 15.”
Parent Du Chátelet notices in the following terms the diminution in the mortality of the Hôtel Dieu from better ventilation:—