In another way also was the principle of central authority very clearly affirmed. The Vestries were not to have a free hand in making their regulations under the 35th Section. Any they made had to be approved by a Secretary of State.
This was a considerable limitation of the freedom of the Vestries, but it secured more or less uniformity in the powers of the local authorities in this particular matter.
But the vigorous administration by all the local authorities of the laws passed to secure the health of the public, was even more greatly to be desired; for, from force of circumstances, the consequences—one way or the other—could not be confined to the sphere of action of each local authority.
The lives and welfare of the inhabitants of this vast city are so closely, so inextricably interwoven that, in matters affecting the public health, the action or inaction of one authority may vitally affect the health and the lives, not alone of its neighbours, but even of the people of the city as a whole. Disease and death are no respecters of municipal boundaries, and are not hemmed in or restrained by lines drawn upon maps or recorded in Acts of Parliament.
This community of interest of the inhabitants of London was, however, scarcely, if at all, recognised by the general public—it was but seldom the motive to action by the local authorities—but some of the Medical Officers of Health now and then referred to it in their reports.
Thus the Medical Officer of Health for Mile-End-Old-Town pointed out (1863) that—
“An untrapped drain, an overcrowded house, an unventilated alley, a rotting dungheap, or a foul closet, may spread disease and sorrow in an entire neighbourhood.”
And the Medical Officer of Health for Paddington pointed out (1870–1) that—
“The danger of harbouring a contagious disease is not confined to the individual suffering—it is a matter that concerns the community.”