|Wellingborough News, 18th February 1882, transcribed by Kay Collins
WELLINGBOROUGH LOCAL BOARD [Extract]
The fortnightly meeting of this Board was held at the Corn Exchange on Tuesday evening, when there were presentMr. D. Dulley (in the chair), and Messrs. T. Slinn, C. Watkin, J. Wallis, T. Pendered, E. Sharman (surveyor), and J. T. Parker, (clerk).
THE SMALL-POX CASES AT RUSHDENThe Clerk read a report from the Medical Officer (Dr. Clark), stating that on the 2nd inst. a railway labourer suffering from small-pox was brought in an open conveyance to the Workhouse, with a note from the surgeon of the men employed on the railway works at Wymington. The Workhouse authorities very properly refused to admit him, and he was then taken to Dr. Clark's residence, with a view of getting him into the Small-pox Hospital. This, however, was also impracticable, as the hospital is exclusively for the use of the parish of Wellingborough, and ultimately the man was taken back to Rushden. He (the Medical Officer) felt it his duty to report the case, and left it to the Board to determine whether it would take any action. Mr. Wallis did not think the Board should do anything, but Mr. Slinn and Mr. Dulley considered that it would be better to take some steps with a view of preventing similar occurrences in future. The Clerk explained, in answer to questions, that the Board could, if it thought fit, prosecute the person who caused the removal to take place. From what he had heard of the case he thought it very probable that the doctor who had authorised the removal could be proceeded against. After some further conversation, in which the Chairman, and Messrs. Wallis and Watkin took part, it was decided that the doctor should be requested to show cause why he should not be proceeded against. [ see below 25th February for more on this case]
|Wellingborough News, 25th February 1882, transcribed by Kay Collins
WELLINGBOROUGH RURAL SANITARY AUTHORITY
The monthly of this Authority was held in the Board-room at the Workhouse on Wednesday last, when there were present Mr. J. W. Watts (in the chair), Rev. T. Richards, and Messrs. J. Siddons, T. H. Wykes, R. Pell, J. H. Coales, G. Denton, T. Parsons, J. Austin, J. Parker, G. Parsons, S. Knight, J. Earl, and S. Parsons.
PROPOSED SMALL-POX HOSPITAL
The Clerk read the resolution passed at the last meeting of the Board of Guardians, requesting the Authority to take into consideration the question of providing accommodation for small-pox cases arising in the Union.Rev. T. Richards thought that if the law required the erection of hospitals it would be far better for the Authority to erect one in each of the relief districts than to call upon the separate parishes to do so. He suggested the appointment of a committee to consider the best sites and other matters of detail.Mr. Wykes thought that pauper cases would arise so seldom that they might be dealt with in the House or a place specially erected on the ground belonging to the Union. There would then be proper attendants close at hand, and great expense would be saved.Rev. T. Richards thought Mr. Wykes' suggestion worthy of consideration.-The Clerk said that the Union was in Wellingborough parish, and the land adjoining was therefore not in the Rural sanitary district, but in the district of the Urban Sanitary Authority. This being so he did not think they could erect a small-pox hospital on it.- Mr. Coales thought the only plan would be to adopt Mr. Richard's suggestion.Mr. Siddons suggested that a single hospital should be erected on the other side of the London and North-Western Railway Station, which would thus be available for the most populous part of the district.In reply to a question by Mr. Richards, the Clerk explained that two Authorities might combine to provide a common hospital. The Wellingborough Local Board had declined to admit cases into their hospital at a given rate for maintenance, but they had never been asked whether they would consent to the Rural Sanitary Authority combining with them in the cost and use of the hospital.Mr. Wykes proposed that a committee wait upon the Local Board of Health to suggest a combination, and after some further conversation, the motion was seconded by Mr. Parker and carried.Rev. T. Richards and Messrs. Watts and Wykes were appointed as a committee.
|Wellingborough News, 25th February 1882, transcribed by Kay Collins
MEDICAL OFFICER'S REPORT [extract]
RUSHDENA case of small-pox has occurred here in the person of a labourer. On Feb. 2nd he was driven over to Wellingborough to the relieving officer. He was sent back to Rushden that same afternoon. Your inspector having then heard of the case took steps to isolate him. I saw the man the next day, and found him suffering from a modified form of small-pox. He was vaccinated for the first time at seven years of age. He left Kentish Town some three weeks ago, and had just got a few days work on the railway. As no one in the village would nurse him, a professional nurse was obtained from Northampton. This case should have been reported to your Inspector. No one has a right to drive such a case about the country. I again suggest the erection of a building for the reception of such cases.
|Wellingborough News, 24th June 1882, transcribed by Kay Collins
VACCINATION CASESRobert Flanders Smith, of Rushden, was summoned for non-compliance with the Vaccination Act. Mr. Packwood, sen., relieving officer, proved the facts. Defendant said he had conscientious objections to vaccination, and as his doctor refused to give him a guarantee that the child would not receive some other disease from vaccination he declined to have it done. The Bench made an order for the child to be vaccinated within a month, and defendant was ordered to pay 10s. 6d. costs. Defendant asked for a week's grace, but the Bench ordered immediate payment, remarking that those who broke the law must be prepared to pay for it.Samuel Parkes, of Rushden, was also summoned, and Mr. Packwood again proved the facts. The Bench made an order for the child to be vaccinated in a month, and defendant was ordered to pay 10s. 6d. costs. Defendant said he should not pay it, and a distress warrant was accordingly issued.Wm. McDonald, of Rushden, summoned for a similar breach of the law, also objected to vaccination, and was ordered to have his child vaccinated, and to pay 10s. 6d. costs.Tom William Cheney Linnett, of Rushden, was also summoned. Mr. Packwood gave the usual evidence as to the age of the child. The defendant asserted that he had not received the notices required by law, but this objection was over-ruled by the Bench. The defendant then said that he obiected to have his child vaccinated (1) because he believed that sanitation and not vaccination was the preventative of small-pox, and (2) because no medical man would give him a guarantee that vaccination would not convey some other disease to his child.The Bench made the same order as in the other cases, and said defendant must pay the costs. The defendant said he doubted whether the Bench had the power to make him pay the costs. He believed that when orders were made the Board of Guardians were required to pay costs.
|Wellingborough News, 1st July 1882, transcribed by Kay Collins
ANTI-VACCINATIONOn Monday evening Mr. T. Freeman presided over a meeting of the anti-vaccination society, at which it was resolved to assist those members who had recently been fined by the magistrates.
|Wellingborough News, 22nd July 1882, transcribed by Kay Collins
Wellingborough Police Court - Friday, July 22.
Before Mr. Spencer Pratt (in the chair), Mr. N. P. Sharman, and Mr. C. J. K. Woolston.
VACCINATION CASESGeorge Henry Sharp, of Rushden, was summoned for not having two of his children vaccinated. In the one case he was fined £1 and 10s. 6d. costs, and in the other case ordered to have the child vaccinated, and to pay 11s. 6d. costs.Arthur Knight, of Rushden, was summoned for a like offence and was ordered to have the child vaccinated and to pay 11s. 6d. costs.
|Wellingborough News, 27th January 1883, transcribed by Kay Collins
Wellingborough Police Court. Friday, Jan. 26th
Mr. N. P. Sharman, in the chair; Mr. C. J. K. Woolston, and Lieut.-Col. Rawlins.
VACCINATION CASESMr. Packwood asked for an adjournment for 14 days in seven vaccination cases, which was allowed.
The Argus, 27th January 1893
Local IntelligenceSMALL-POX-Another case of small-pox has broken out at Rushden, the patient being a girl named Amy Dickens, residing in Little-street. The case is being promptly dealt with by the Local Board officials.