Author Topic: 1800 Hackney Disease  (Read 4075 times)

Offline DavidTaylor

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 373
    • View Profile
1800 Hackney Disease
« on: Saturday 07 August 10 21:27 BST (UK) »
Hello!

Hello:


I was in in midst of tracing my family who resided on Well St from at least 1804-1945 (probably much earlier than 1804 but haven't established it yet) and most of whom are buried in St John at Hackney. I noticed that at least 4 of the children of George and Grace Taylor died from 1812-1814, 2 on the same day, and they may have had 7 in total that died from 1805-1814.  I was wondering if there is a record of some major outbreak of disease in the area during those years or if this was just par for the course in those days?

Thank you
David Taylor  ???

Offline Hackstaple

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,872
  • Family researcher
    • View Profile
Re: 1800 Hackney Disease
« Reply #1 on: Saturday 07 August 10 21:41 BST (UK) »
Cholera was endemic to area but mostly seemed to have 20 year intervals between major epidemics. There was one in 1832 and one in 1853 but I can't find done in about 1812.
Southern or Southan [Hereford , Monmouthshire & Glos], Jenkins, Meredith and Morgan [Monmouthshire and Glos.], Murrill, Damary, Damry, Ray, Lawrence [all Middx. & London], Nethway from Kenn or Yatton. Also Riley and Lyons in South Africa and Riley from St. Helena.
Any census information included in this post is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline DavidTaylor

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 373
    • View Profile
Re: 1800 Hackney Disease
« Reply #2 on: Saturday 07 August 10 21:43 BST (UK) »
Since there were no formal death certificates, other than a burial entry, did they record causes of death anywhere?

Offline Valda

  • Moderator
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • ********
  • Posts: 16,160
    • View Profile
Re: 1800 Hackney Disease
« Reply #3 on: Saturday 07 August 10 22:03 BST (UK) »
Hi

Unless it indicates in the burial register a date of death which would be very unusual you only know their date of burial not their date of death. Obviously burial followed on in most circumstances pretty quickly after death, but a burial on the same day doesn't mean the children died on the same day.

Looking at young children's death certificates in London after the start of civil registration one of the major causes of death was measles. You then have the other childhood diseases - scarlet fever etc. Once one child caught the disease you would expect others to catch it, so as far as children's deaths go more likely childhood illnesses than epidemics. If it was an epidemic you would expect adults in the family to also die.


'One of the greatest killers of very young children was diarrhea, which could kill an infant within 48 hours. Outbreaks of diarrhea resulted from a combination of poor sanitation, lack of hygiene, and unusually steamy summers. Children who did not die were often left in such a weakened condition that they later fell victim to other diseases such as measles, pneumonia, or bronchitis.

Among the deadly hazards older children faced were scarlet fever, measles, diphtheria, and smallpox. Leaving many victims who survived blind or deaf, scarlet fever was prevalent in America for much of the century, affecting children from age two to ten. In England, it raged from the 1840s through the 1870s among children aged four to eight. Measles outbreaks in England in 1863 and 1874 proved even more deadly. Consumption claimed the majority of victims throughout the century, with whooping cough another significant killer.'


The poorer the family the more likely the family circumstances would impact on whether the children were able to survive or not such childhood diseases.


Regards

Valda
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Offline DavidTaylor

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 373
    • View Profile
Re: 1800 Hackney Disease
« Reply #4 on: Sunday 08 August 10 15:39 BST (UK) »
Thanks Valda.. They must have registered a cause of death somewhere though, no? I mean, I know they didn't know alot medically, but when a 9 year old child died, surely they did some sort of investigation or post mortem and recorded it? If not, there must have been alot of infanticide that people got away with!

Offline Valda

  • Moderator
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • ********
  • Posts: 16,160
    • View Profile
Re: 1800 Hackney Disease
« Reply #5 on: Sunday 08 August 10 16:07 BST (UK) »
Hi

The National Archives research leaflet

Coroner's Inquests

'It has been the duty of coroners since 1194 to investigate the circumstances of unnatural, sudden, or suspicious deaths, and deaths in prison.'

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/RdLeaflet.asp?sLeafletID=175


They might not have modern antibiotics to treat diseases or even understand their causes, but that didn't mean they didn't have vast experience of recognising childhood diseases. If the death was considered to be from natural causes a Coroner would not be involved.

Civil registration began 1st July 1837.


Regards

Valda
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Jeuel

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,346
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1800 Hackney Disease
« Reply #6 on: Sunday 08 August 10 23:58 BST (UK) »
Infant mortality was very high, especially in the poorer parts of London.   My rural rellies were much healthier.  In London families were often in over-crowded conditions sharing sanitary arrangements with several other households so its easy to see how diseases spread.

London burial entries I've seen often state "convulsions" as a cause of death though of course convulsions are caused by high temperatures, which in turn are caused by fever or infection.

Other causes that were common were TB, cholera, typhoid, measles, whooping cough, diphtheria. 

My gt grandmother had two babies die of "tabes mesenterica" and one of "Purpura haemorrhagica" which are terms we don't hear now.

As for infanticide - yes it was common.  There was no legal abortion or family planning clinics.  Babies were often killed but we can't know how many.  I've seen in inquest papers several babies who were found drowned in parcels.  Sometimes children were poisoned - it was estimated that half the deaths by poisoning were child deaths, though of course not all of these would be deliberate.
Chowns in Buckinghamshire
Broad, Eplett & Pope in St Ervan/St Columb Major, Cornwall
Browning & Moore in Cambridge, St Andrew the Less
Emms, Mealing & Purvey in Cotswolds, Gloucestershire
Barnes, Dunt, Gray, Massingham in Norfolk
Higho in London
Matthews & Nash in Whichford, Warwickshire
Smoothy, Willsher in Coggeshall & Chelmsford, Essex

Offline Valda

  • Moderator
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • ********
  • Posts: 16,160
    • View Profile
Re: 1800 Hackney Disease
« Reply #7 on: Monday 09 August 10 00:06 BST (UK) »
Hi


On average the infant mortality rate (death before the age of one - so really the death of babies not children) was in the high teens (out of 100 live births) in London. For foundlings and illegitimate children it tended to be higher.


Regards

Valda
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk