60 



1863, page 5. It is from a paper read by Dr. Hall, wlio said : — 



*' From the long list I shall select for illustration, Macclesfield, 

 •^ manufacturing town of 63,327 inhabitants in the county of 

 Cheshire. I cite this example specially, because the question of 

 economy to the public purse is so well exemplified by the diminu- 

 tion of crime, the repression of pauperism, and the consequent 

 elevation of the moral character, which has resulted from the 

 vigorous measures undertaken by the zealous and enlightened 

 municipal authorities of this town to improve the physical health 

 and enjoyments of the people. The rate of mortality in this 

 borough for the seven years before sanitary improvements were 

 •commenced was 33 in 1,000. At the end of five years afterwards it 

 ivas reduced to 26 in the 1,000. In children under 5 years of age, 

 however, the death rate was diminished 13 per cent. In funeral 

 expenses alone, calculated from the returns of 232 burial-clubs, 

 £8,729 was saved. But there were 28,420 less cases of sickness also, 

 which efi'ected a further saving of £28,420. The duration of life 

 was, moreover, increased by 3 years. Crime generally was dimin- 

 ished 4 per cent., and drunkenness amongst the working classes 

 became considerably less. The reporter Mr. John May says : — 

 * These figures viewed in any light whatever cannot fail to carry con- 

 Tiction in favour of the policy of energetic sanitary measures ; and 

 although landlords and cottage owners are, generally speaking, 

 supposed to be objectors to what are necessarily expensive works, 

 their personal interest is assuredly in favour of their execution. 

 Houses are better occupied, tenants are less subject to sickness, 

 Tents are better paid, and repairs and dilapidations are diminished. 

 I may add thereto, also, that the police, insurance, and jooor rates, 

 are likewise so much reduced, that ultimately the expenditure in 

 waterworks, drainage, and other sanitary measures, becomes a wise 

 economy. What would the City of Hobart save, if some of its 

 worst streets could exhibit a decrease of 23 per cent, in trials for 

 " drunkenness and disorderly conduct •/' " 60 per cent, in making 

 use of obscene and profane language ; " " 58 percent, in gambling ;" 

 and in summary charges of every class, 26 per cent. ? What should 

 we save in the support of widows and orphans, if the death rate 

 of husbands and fathers was reduced in Hobart Town to Avhat it is 

 in the rural districts of Tasmania ? Last year — the healthiest on 

 record for this island— the death rate in the city of Hobart for both 

 S9xes, aged from 20 to 60, was about 23 per 1,000, of those living 

 at that age, at the census of 1861 ; while in the country districts 

 the rate Avas only 7 per 1,000 or less than one-third. Yet Ely in 

 England has done more than this. Hydraulic skill in providing a 

 copioiis and pure supply of water, and establishing a perfect removal 

 of effete and injurious matters by good sewerage, in that town, has 

 reduced its rate of mortality to less than that of the surrounding 

 country, though previously it was very much in excess of it. Ely, 

 moreover, does not possess the local advantages for sanitary engi- 

 neering that Hobart city does. The money loss on the 148 men and 

 women, aged from 20 to 60, who died in Hobart city, over and 

 above the natural death rate of the country districts of the island, 

 would surely much exceed the additional cost entailed upon us by 

 the interest of the outlay on our new waterworks, and an equally 



