NationalLibraryOfScotland/medical-history-of-british-india huggingface dataset:
186
REPORT OF THE LEPROSY COMMISSION:
DIVISION,
Hill
Tracts.
(
\
)
Meerut . <
(
(
Agra
(
District.
Assam—contd.
Khasi and Jaintia
Hills .
Cachar Hills .
Naga Hills
Garo Hills
.
TOTAL
FOR
HILL
TRACTS
North Lushai .
.
TOTAL FOR THE PROV-
INCE OF ASSAM
North-Western
Provinces.
Dehra Dun
Saharanpur
Muzaffarnngar
.
Meerut
Bulandshahr .
Aligarh
.
TOTAL FOR MEERUT
Muttra
Agra
,
...
Farrukhabad .
Mainpuri
.
Etawah .
Etah
TOTAL FOR AGRA .
Total
Population
on which thê
epcr-ratios
have been
calculated.
197,904
18,941
122,867
121,570
461,282
2,044
5,435,243
168,135
I,OOI,28o
772,874
i,39 I ,458
949,914
1,043,172
5,326,833
713.421
1,003,796
858,687
762,163
727,629
702,063
4,767,759
Total
number of
Lepers,
94
25
126
137
382
Nil.
6,727
345
174
137
290
241
130
i>3i7
153
207
"3
98
64
162
797
Propor-
tion per
10,000
of popu-
lation.
47
i3'i
IO'2
IV 2
82
—
I2'3
20-5
I'7
17
2 - 0
2-5
V2
2-4
2-1
2"O
1'3
1*2
•8
2-3
16
REMARKS,
Distribution of Lepers, etc., 1891.
187
DIVISION,
(
\
\
Rohiicund <
/
1
Allahabad (
{
Benares . *(
<
Gorakh- <
pur. ,
District.
North-Western
Provinces—contd.
Bareilly
Bijnor
.
Budaun
.
Moradabad
Shahjahanpur
Pilibhit
TOTAL FOR ROHIL-
CUND
Cawnpore
Fatehpur
.
Banda
Hamirpur
Allahabad
Jhansi
Jalaun
Lalitpur
TOTAL FOR ALLAHA-
BAD
Benares
Mirzapur
.
Jaunpur
.
.
Ghazipur
.
Ballia
TOTAL FOR BENARES
Goraklipur
Basti
Azamgarh
,
TOTAL FOR GORAKH
PUR
Total
Population
)n which the
Leper-ratios
have been
calculated.
1,040,691
794,070
925,593
1,179.398
9 l8 .55i
485-366
5.343,674
1,209,695
699.157
7o5,£32
513.720
1,548,737
407,436
396,361
274,200
5,755,138
921,943
1,161,508
1,264,949
1,077,909
942,465
5,368,774
2,994>°57
1,785,844
1,728,625
6,508,526
Total
lumber of
Lepers.
342
2S0
279
685
426
119
2,131
237
94
449
350
355
168
137
132
1,922
3 T 4
274
223
40c
333
i,55:
I,OI1
'
63!
56
2,21
Propor-
tion per
10,000
of popu-
lation.
32-
3 - 5
3'0
5-8
4-6
2-4
3'9
x
"9
i"3
6-3
6-8
2'2
4'i
3"4
4-8
3'3
3'4
2-3
i'7
3 - 7
3'5
2-6
3 - :
3
3-
1
3 -
0
3"
REMARKS.
3
2
3
188
REPORT OF THE LEPROSY COMMISSION:
DIVISION.
{
Kumaon <
I
Lucknow. -
Fyzabad .«
r
r
District.
North-Western
Provinces— concl d.
Kumaon
Garhwal
.
Tarai
TOTAL FOR KUMAON
TOTAL
FOR THE
NORTH-WESTERN
" PROVINCES
Oudh.
Lucknow
Unao
.
.
Rae Bareli
.
Sitapur .
Hardoi .
Kheri .
TOTAL FOR LUCK-
NOW
Fyzabad
Gonda
Baraich .
.
Sultanpur
Partabgarh
Bara Banki
TOTAL FOR FYZABAD
Total for Oudh
Total for North
W estern Prov-
inces and Oudh .
Total
Population
on which the
Leper-ratios
have been
calculated.
563,181
407,818
210,568
1,181,567
34,252,271
774.163
953.636
1.036,521
1,075,413
I,II3,2U
9°3.6l5
5.856,559
1.216,959
1,459,229
1,000,432
I,O75.85I
910,895
1,130,906
6,794,272
12,650,831
46,903,102
Total
number of
Lepers.
I,U3
692
33
1
1,838
11,768
360
3IO
494
605
299
239
2,307
753
349
303
527
216
848
2,996
5,303
17,071
Propor-
tion per
10,000
of popu-
lation.
197
16-9
1*5
i5"5
3-4
46
3-2
47
5-6
26
26
3'9
6-i
2'3
3-0
4-8
2 - 3
7"4
4"4
4"i
3-6
REMARKS.
Distribution of Lepers, etc., 1891.
189
Dtvrs.'ON.
Feudatory /
States . i
C
Delhi
. ]
(
Hissar
. '.
Umballa . -
1
Jullundur. -
District.
Oudh— contd.
ampur State.
fehri Garhwal
TOTAL FOR FEUDA-
TORY STATES
TOTAL FOR NORTH-
WESTERN PROV-
INCES AND OUDH,
INCLUDING FEUDA-
TORY STATES
Punjab and British
Beluchistan.
Delhi
Gurgaon.
.
Karnal .
.
TOTAL FOR DELHI .
Hissar .
.
Rohtak .
TOTAL FOR HISSAR .
Umballa
Ludhiana
Simla
,
.
.
TOTAL FOR UMBALLA
Jullundur
.
Hoshiarpur
.
Kangra ,
.
TOTAL FOR JULLUN-
DUR
Total
Population
)n which the
Leper-ratios
have been
calculated.
55! ' 2 49
241,242
792,491
47>695»593
638,689
668,929
683,718
i>99 1 >33 6
776,006
590,475
1,366,481
1,033,427
648,722
44,642
1,726,791
1
r
9°7vS83
j 1,011,659
763,030
2,682,272
Total
lumber of
Lepers.
69
3'°3
79
I7'-15O
81
174
95
350
132
69
201
339
122
129
590
20c
33C
82J
i>37c
Propor-
tion per
10,000
of popu-
lation.
I"2
12-8
47
3-6
I '2
2-6
i "3
i'7
17
i'i
'"4
3-2
1-8
28-8
3'4
>
2-3
i
3'2
5 io-8
REMARKS.
190
REPORT OF THE LEPROSY COMMISSION:
DIVISION.
Amritsar . <
Lahore . <
Rawal-
J
pindi
j
\
Mooltan. \
Derajat , <
District.
Punjab and British
Baluchistan— cont d.
Amritsar
Gurdaspur
Sialkot .
.
TOTAL FOR AMRIT-
SAR
Lahore .
.
•
Gujranwala .
.
Ferozepore
TOTAL FOR LAHORE .
Rawalpindi
Jhelum .
Gujrat .
Shahpur
TOTAL FOR RAWAL-
PINDI .
Mooltan
.
»
Jhang .
Montgomery .
Muzaffargarh .
TOTAL FOR MOOLTAN
Dera Ismail Khan
Dera Ghazi Khan
Bannu .
TOTAL FOR DERAJAT
Total
Population
on which the
Leper-ratios
have been
calculated.
992,697
943>922
1,119,847
3,056,466
1,075,379
690,169
886,676
2.652,224
887,194
609,056
760,875
493,588
2,750,713
631,434
436,841
499,521
381,095
1,948,891
486,201
404,031
372,276
1,262,508
Total
number of
Lepers.
151
164
167
482
52
40
137
229
325
141
192
38
696
30
23
31
43
127
16
30
32
78
Propor-
tion per
10,000
o£ popu-
lation.
1'5
I "7
i'4
i'S
•4
•5
i'5
•8
3-6
2-3
2-5
•7
2'5
•4
•5
•6
i'i
•6
'.3
•7
•8
•6
REMARKS.
Distribution of Lepers, etc, 1891.
191
DIVISION.
Peshawar • <
British )
Balu- [
chistan. )
f
Punjab
Feudatory,
States. '
V
District.
Punjab and British
3eluchistan—concld.
Peshawar
.
.
Hazara .
Kohat .
TOTAL FOR PESHA-
WAR
Biluch Tribes.
Quetta .
TOTAL FOR THE PUN-
JAB AND BRITISH
BALUCHISTAN.
Punjab Feudatory-
States.
Patiala .
Nabha .
Kapurthala .
Jind
Faridkot
Maler Kotla .
Kalsia .
Dujana .
Pataudi .
Loharu .
Bahawalpur
Mandi .
Chamba .
Naha'n .
Bilaspur.
Bashahr
Nalagarh
Suket .
Keonthal
Total
Population
n which the
-eper-ratios
have been
calculated.
703,768
516,288
2O3,I7S
1,423,231
5,934
27,270
20,894,117
1.583,521
282,756
299,690
284,560
115,040
75,755
68,633
26,450
19,002
20,139
650,042
166,923
124,032
124,134
91,760
75,727
S4.O32
5 2 .4O3
37>32O
Total
number of
Lepers.
59
156
13
228
Nil.
2
4,353
186
28
89
21
13
24
14
5
Nil.
3
30
250
422
264
27
IOI
5
22
179
Propor-
:ion per
10,000
of popu-
lation.
•8
3"°•
6
i-6
—
7
2-O
I'l
•9
2-9
•7
I"I
3"i
2'0
r8
—
1 "4
•4
14-9
34"o
21*2
2-9
i3"3
•9
4 - i
47"9
REMARKS.
192
REPORT OF THE LEPROSY COMMISSION:
DIVISION.
/
Punjab
Feudatory-
States,
(
Nagpur . <
(
District.
Punjab Feuda-
tory States— contd.
Baghal .
Jubbal .
Bhajji
Kumharsain .
Mailog .
Baghat .
Balsan .
Kuthar .
Dhami .
.
.
Tarhoch.
.
Sangri .
Kunhiar
Biia
Mangal*
Darkoti
Total for the Punjab
Feudatory States .
TOTAL FOR THE PUN-
JAB AND BRITISH
BELUCHISTAN, IN-
CLUDING
FEUDA-
TORY STATES
Central Provin-
ces, f
Nagpur •
Bhandara
.
Chanda .
.
Wardha .
Balaghat
TOTAL FOR NAGPUR
Total
Population
n which the
Leper-ratios
have been
calculated.
24.545
21,412
12,205
10,416
9>3 2 9
8,668
5.40
3.947
3,9 8 5
3,938
2,606
1.957
1,171
1,091
595
4,263,280
*5.i57i397
Total
number of
Lepers.
14
50
5»
40
9
16
27
6
6
n
1
2
Nil.
4
Nil.
1,920
6,273
Propor-
tion per
IOJOOO
of popu-
lation.
5"7
23 3
417
38-4
9'6
18-4
49-1
15-2
15-0
27-9
38
IO"2
—
j6'6
4-5
2-4
...
...
...
REMARKS.
• Rawai and Dadhi have
been included in the
statistical returns for
Simla.
t Returns rot received.
*
Distribution of Lepers, etc., i89i.
193
DIVISION.
(
\
Jubbul-I
pore.
I
I
Narbada .
(
Chattis-}
garh.
)
(.
(
Berar
(
District.
Central Provinces
— contd.
fubbulpore
Saugor .
Damoh .
Seoni
Mandla .
TOTAL FOR JUBBUL-
PORB
Hoshangabad .
Narsinghpur .
BetuI
Chhindwara .
Nimar
TOTAL FOR NAKBADA
Raipur- .
Bilaspur.
Sambalpur
TOTAL FOR CHATHS-
GARH .
Berar.
Amraoti .
Akola
Ellichpur
Buldana
Wun
Basim .
.
TOTAL FOR BERAR
Total
Population
1 which the
Leper-ratios
have been
calculated.
|
1
j
i | 1
I
i
!
...
655.64s
574.782
315.798
481,021
471,613
398,»8i
2,897,040
Total
number of
Lepers.
...
1
...
93 2
910
524
779
377
176
3,698
Propor-
ion per
10,000
if popu-
lation.
1 i
i
!
..
•
1
... j
...
*
14*2
15-8
16-5
16-1
7'9
4*4
127
REMARKS.
1
1
I
1
o
194
REPORT OF THE LEPROSY COMMISSION :
DIVISION.
Madras .,
1
Madras
Feudatory
States.
r
District.
°»
h
c
Madras.
Ganjam .
Vizagapatam .
.
Godavari
Kistna .
Nellore .
Cuddapah
Kurnool .
Anantapur
Bellary .
.
Chingleput
North Arcot .
South Arcot .
Tanjore .
.
.
Trichinopoly .
Madura .
Tinnevelly
Salem .
.
Coimbatore .
Nilgiris .
Malabar.
.
South Canara
Madras City .
TOTAL
FOR
THE
BRITISH DISTRICTS
OF MADRAS .
Madras Feudatory
States.
Tn van core .
Cochin .
.
Pudukota
Banganapalle .
Sandur .
Ganjam Agency
\ Godavari ,, *
Total for Feudatory
States .
TOTAL FOR MADRAS
PRESIDENCY,
IN-
CLUDING
FEUDA-
TORY STATES
Total
opulation
which the fi
eper-ratlos
ave been
alculated.
.589,477
,943,211
,951,645
,855,582
,463,736
,272,072
817,811
7°8-549
900,126
,136,928
2,180,487
2,162,851
2,228,114
1,372,717
2,608,404
1,916,095
1,962,591
2,004,839
99,797
2,652,565
1,056,081
452,5i8
4,33 6 > I 96
2,557,73 6
722,906
373,096
35,196
11,388
307,326
127,137
4J35P85
38,471,281
'l
Total t
umber of
Lepers, c
817
964
906
485
42O
180
171
88
259
68g
1,136
1,033
710
322
564
411
236
101
40
1,172
916
347
11,967
968
35o
IOI
18
2
279
86
1,804
'ropor-
on per
10,000
f popu-
lation.
5*i
4"9
4-6
2-6
2-8
i"4
2-0
1*2
2-8
6-o
5"2
47
3"«
2'3
21
21
12
•5
4'O
4"4
86
7-6
3"4
37
4-8
27
5"o
17
9-0
6-9
43
REMARKS.
* Returns for Vizagapa-
tam Agency not received.
Distribution of Lepers, etc, 1891.
195
DIVIS:ON.
(
Arakan . J
{
(
\
Pegu
.
(
1
Irrawad- "*
dy.
J
y
*
{
Tenasser- .
im.
District.
Lower Burma.
Akyab .
Northern Arakan
Kyaukpyu
.
Sandoway
TOTAL FOR ARAKAN
Pegu
Rangoon Town
Hanthawaddy.
Tharrawaddy .
Prome „
TOTAL FOR PEGU
Thongwa
.
.
Bassein .
Henzada
Thayetmyo
TOTAL
FOR IRRA-
WADDY .
Amherst
Tavoy
Mergui .
Shwegyin
.
Toungoo
.
Salween
.
TOTAL FOR TENAS-
SERIM .
TOTAL FOR LOWER
BURMA
Total
Population
on which the
Leper-ratios
have been
calculated.
416,305
14,628
163,832
77.134
671,899
301,420
180,324
267,039
347.454
360,252
1,456,489
446,076
475,002
380,927
250,161
i)552,166
417,312
9.1,921
73,748
198,521
162,132
3^.439
978,073
4,658,627
Total
number of
Lepers.
IO7
41
5O
8
2o6
308
67
23O
228
206
1.039
462
403
322
164
107
16
35
97
97
12
364
2,960
3 ropor-
on per
10,000
'popu-
ation.
2'5
28-0
3«o
ro
3-0
10*2
37
8-6
6-5
57
7"'
10-3
8-4
8-4
6-5
87
2'5
16
47
4-8
5'9
3-8
37
6-3
REMARKS.
O 2
ig6
REPORT OF THE LEPROSY COMMISSION:
DIVISION.
N orthern
Central .
(
Southern <
(
Eastern • <
i
District.
Upper Burma.
Mandalay
Bhamo .
£atha
Shwebo .
.
Ruby Mines .
TOTAL TOR NORTH-
ERN
.
.
.
I
Ye-u
.
.
.
Sagaing
Lower Chindwin
Upper Chindwin
.
TOTAL FOR CENTRAL
Myingyan
Pakk6ku
Minbu .
Magwe .
TOTAL FOR SOUTH-
ERN
Kyaukse
„
.
Meiktila
Yamethin
.
Pyinmana
.
.
TOTAL FOR EASTERN
TOTAL FOR UPPER
BURMA
TOTAL FOR BRITISH
BURMA
Total
Population
on which the
Leper-ratios '
have been
calculated.
I
I
374io6o
54,257
59.329
135.255
26,134
<549,O35
92,549
248207
232 245
75.402
648,403
303,753
224,175
219,190
1,098,829
126,622
206,650
160,662
56,349
5SO.2S3
2,946,550
7,605,177
•
Total
umber of
Lepers, c
1
598
2O
30
108
13
769
93
424
358
59
934
533
271
270
249
1.323
m
230
99
38
478
3.504
6,464
'ropor-
tion ptr
10,000
f popu-
lation.
15*9
3 -6
5'o
T9
4'9
11-8
IO'O
170
i5'4
7 -8
144
IS'"
8-9
I2 - 0
ii3
I2'O
87
in
6-i
6 7
8-6
II-S
S-4
REMARKS,
j
1
Distribution of Lepers, etc., 1891.
197
DIVISION.
(
\
Gujarat . J
V
)
(
Konkan. }
(
\
]
Deccan . -^1
/
f
Western j
Karnatic ^D
istrict.
1
-
-
•
-
-
-
|
Bombay.
Ahmedabad
Kaira
Panch Mahals
Broach .
Surat
TOTAL FOR GUJARAT
Thana
Kolaba .
Ratnaoiri
TOTAL FOR KONKAN
Khrandesh
Nasik
Ahmednagar .
Poona
Sholapur
Satara .
TOT\L FOR DECCAN
Belgaum
Dharwar
Kaladgi or Bijapur .
Kanara .
TOTAL
POR WEST-
EKN KARNATIC
Total
Population
on which the
Leper-ratios
have been
calculated.
i
1
921,712
871,589
3*3,4*7
341.490
649,989
3,098,197
904,868
509,584
ii 105,926
2,520,378
1,460,851
843.S82
888,755
1,067,800
750,689
1,225,989
6,237,666
1,013,261
1,051,314
796,339
446,351
3,307,265
i
Total
number of
Lepers.
96
120
73
77
242
608
559
464
1,083
2,106
1,699
425
695
1,078
607
1,488
5,992
338
214
33i
19
902
Propor-
tion per
10,000
af popu-
lation.
ro
i-3
2-3
2-2
3"7
1 -9
6-i
9-1
97
8-3
n-6
5'0
7-8
IO'O
80
12 - 1
9-6
3'3
2-O
4" 1
•4
27
REMARKS,
1
198
REPORT OF THE LEPROSY COMMISSION:
DIVISION.
(
\
Sind
. -I
Bombay
Feudatory I
States.
Total
1 Population
ni^trirt
°° which the
n
District.
Leper-ratios "
have been i ot
calculated. |
Bombay—contd.
Kurrachee
.
.
564,880
Hyderabad
.
. 918,646
Shikarpur
.
.
9*5)497 |
Thar and Parkar .
298,203
Upper Sind Frontier
174,548
TOTAL FOR SIND • 2,871,774
City and Island of
1
Bombay
.
.
821,764 1
TOTAL FOR BOMBAY
PRESIDENCY (BRI-
TISH TERRITORY*) 18,857,044
(18,901,123) (1
Bombay Feudatory
Cfofpc
0 caics.
Cutch .
.
.
558,415
1
|
Palanpur
.
.
645,526 j
Mahi Kantha .
.
581,568
Kathiawar
.
. 2,752,404
Rewa Kantha .
.
733>5°6
Cambay .
.
.
85,722
Narukot
.
. 1 •••
Surat Agency .
.
181,208
Jawhar .
.
.
52,831
Janjira .
.
.
81,780
Savantvadi
.
.
I9 2 .94 8
The Dangs .
.
32,9 20
Surgana
.
.
12,398
Satara Jagirs .
.
l3hS 2 9
Bhor
.
.
.
155.669
Akalkot .
.
.
75.774
Jath
.
.
.
79,786
Kolhapur
.
.
9^3^3 l
Southern
Maratha
Jagirs .
.
. 639,270
Khairpur
.
.
131,937
Savanur
.
.
i6,97 6
Total for Feudatory
States .
.
. 8,oog,2g8
TOTAL FOR BOMBAY
PKESIDENCY,
IN-
CLUDING
FEUDA-
TORY STATES
. 26,916,342
|(26,9 f io,42i)
Pr
Cotal tio
imber 10
Lepers, of
la
55
58
74
7
J 5
209
369
10,186
0,187)
27
54
65
426
3 r 9
8
...
5i
36
79
35
3 i
6 i
76
143
23
14
956
227
6
Nil.
2,554
12,740
(12,741)
opor-
n rer
,000
30pU-
tion.
"9
•6
•8
• 2 i
•8
7
4*4
5'4 *
[5-3)
•4
'8
i'i
i'5
4'3
•8
...
28
6-8
9-6
i-8
"9
4-8
57
9-1
3"o
i"7
io"4
3'5
•4
—
31
47*
(47)t
REMARKS.
Exclusive of Aden, The
figures in brackets denote
:he numbers and ratios
nclusive of Aden
* Exclusive of Aden,
t Inclusive of Aden.
Distribution of Lepers, etc, 1891.
199
DIVISION,
Ajmere-
(
Mer-
i
wara
C.
Mysore . '
1
I
Coorg
Hydera- S
bad,
1
District.
Ajmere-Merwara.
Ajmere .
.
Merwara
.
TOTAL FOR AJMERE-
MERWARA
Mysore.
Bangalore*
Kolar
.
Tuinkur .
Mysore .
Hassan .
Shimoga
Kadur
Chitaldroog
TOTAL FOR MYSORE!
Coorg .
TOTAL FOR MYSORE
AND COORG .
The Nizam's Domi-
nions.
Hyderabad City
Suburbs and Secun-
derabad
TOTAL FOR HYDER-
ABAD
Total
Population
m which the
Leper-ratios
have been
calculated.
422,359
119> 999
S4 2 .358
702,913
59I.O3O
580,786
1,181,814
5i4>95 2
527,981
33°>°63
413.984
4,843,523
(4>943> 6°4 )
I73,O55
5.016,578
(5,116,659)+
124,057
290,982
415.039
Total
number of
Lepers.
II
16
27
239
185
44
149
69
55
17
44
S02
(814)
23
825
(837)
29
76
105
Propor-
tion per
10,000
of popu-
lation.
•2
I'3
'4
3 "4
3"i
y 2
1 "3
vo
"5
I'O
1-6
(1-6)
i*3
v6
(1-6)
2-3
2-6
2-5
REMARKS.
* Exclusive of Bangalore
City (British portion).
t The figures in brnckcts
denote the numbers and
ratios inclusive of Ban-
galore.
% Figures in brackets in-
clusive of Bangalore
City.
2oo
REPORT OF THE LEPROSY COMMISSION:
DIVISION.
t
Telin- 1
gana.
\
\
Mahrath-
wara.
i
Kanara or
Karnatic.
District.
The Nizam's
Dominions— contd.
Atraf-i-Balda .
Mahbubnagar (Na-
gad, Karfiul)
Nalgonda
Worangal
(Kha-
mam) .
•
Yelgandal
Indur
Medak .
TOTAL FOR TELIN-
GANA
Aurangabad
Bid
Nanded .
Naldrug
Bidar
Parbhani
Sirpur Tandur
TOTAL
FOR MAH
RAT H WAR A
' Gulbarga
I R aichur
,. Lingsugur
TOTAL FOR KANAI
OR KARNATIC
RAILWAYS
TOTAI;
FOR
Tt
NIZAM'S DOMINIO
Total
3 opulation
n which the
.eper-ratios
have been
calculated.
3S9J84
674,0^9
62.1,617
853,i 2 9
1,09.1,601
639'5&8
3 6 4,73S
4,6+i>"3
828,975
642,722
632,529
649,272
9Oi,9S-|
805,33.
231,754
• 4,692,57
649,25
512,45
620,01
A
. J 781.72
6.55
IE
Ns n,537>°4
Total
imber of
Lepers.
io6
91
157
200
171
2r3
i,°53
30C
23d
92
33<-
21;
11 í
5
t
i ,34
S
16
5
11
4
19
7
4/
0
Ail
\.O
2,9'
Propor-
tion per
10,000
of popu-
lation.
2-6
I"5
1-4
1
1-8 ¡
1-8 1
2-6
6-1
2-2
3-6
36
i'4
>
50
5
2-3
2
13
1
2-4
5
28
1
2-4
9
2-3
3
3'1
3
2-6
—
77
2-5
REMARKS.'
Distribution of Lepers, etc, 1891.
201
DIVISION.
Meywar
Residency
Jodhpore )
Residency ;
(
Bickaneer )
Agency, j
T*
(
Jeypore )
Residency )
(
East State )
Agency. *
D ¡strict.
Rajputana.
Meywar
Banswara
Kusalgarh
Dungarpur
Partabgarh
TOTAL FOR MEYWAR .
Jodhpore
.
Sirohee .
Jeysulmere
TOTAL FOR JODHPORE
Bickaneer
.
.
TOTAL FOR BICKA-
NEER .
Jeypore .
.
Kishengurh
Lawa
.
.
TOTAL FOR JEYPORE
Bhurtpore
Kerowlee
Dholpur .
.
TOTAL
FOR EAST
STATE .
.
.
Total
Population
n which thê
eper-ratios
have been
calculated.
1,709,781
180,268
5.775
98,448
61,270
2,055,542
2,519.868
186,025
115,701
2,821,594
831,955
831,955
2,832,276
125,516
3,3 6°2
,961,152
64°.3°3
156,587
279,729
1,076,619
Total
umber of
Lepers,
78
2
2
IO
6l
I53
534
47
13
S94
259
259
148
12
3
163
89
20
73
182
3
ropor-
tion per
10,000
)£ popu-
lation.
•4
'I
3'4
ro
9"9
7
2-1
2'5
I"I
2'I
3'1
3" 1
•5
'9
8-9
•5
1 '3
T2
26
1-6
REMARKS.
2o2
REPORT OF THE LEPROSY COMMISSION :
DIVISION.
Ulwur
")
Agency, j
Jhallawar )
Agency. )
Harowtee C
and Tonk <
Agency. /
Kotah
}
Agency J
(
Canton-
ments. " *
District.
Rajputana—contd.
Ulwur .
.
TOTAL FOR ULWUR .
Jhallawar
.
TOTAL FOR JHALLA-
WAR
Tonk
Boondee.
Shahpura
.
TOTAL FOR HAROW-
TEE AND TONK
Kotah .
TOTAL FOR KOTAH .
Erin pura
Kherwara
.
.
Kotra
Abu
TOTAL FOR CANTON-
MENTS .
Total for Rajputana
Total
Population
on which the
Leper-ratios
have been
calculated.
767,786
767,786
343>6°i
343.6°I
380,069
295.675
63,646
739.39°5
26,267
526,267
1.859
150
92
2,749
12,126,655
Total
number of
Lepers.
79
79
92
92
53
6 9
1
123
3
63
' Leper
Propor-
lon per
10,000
f pop il-
lation.
ro
I'O
2-6
2-6
1 "3
2 - 3
'i
1-6
I'Ï
ri
oopula-
y tion of these
\ cantonments
J is stated to
"S have been in-
J eluded with
( their respec-
v. tive states.
—
1,708
—
1'4
REMARKS.
Distribution of Lepers, etc., 1891.
203
DIVISION.
Central
India
Agency.
District.
Central India
Agency.*
Bhopawar
Indore .
.
Gwalior .
.
.
Western Malwa
.
Bhopal .
Bundelkhand .
.
Goona .
Baghelkhand .
TOTAL FOR CENTRAL
INDIA AGENCY
Railways and Can-
tonments. †
Aden Settlement
Andaman Isles
Bangalore (Civil and
Military)
.
Central India Rail-
ways ,
Central India Can-
tonments
.
Total for Railways
and Cantonments
Total
Population
on which the
Leper-ratios
have been
calculated.
978,638
372,792
1,757,509
1,619,368
2,006,859
1,508,053
337.973
870,184
9,451,376
44,079
15,609
100,081
4.448
95,238
259,455
Total
number of
Lepers.
1
1
1
36
16
3
22
—
80
1
1
12
12
26
Propor-
tion per
10,000
of popu-
lation.
.01
.02
.005
.2
.07
.01
.6
—
.08
.2
.6
1.1
1.2
1.0
REMARKS,
* Incomplete,
+ So far as they have not
been included in previous
figures—incomplete.
|
204
REPORT OF THE LEPROSY COMMISSION:
CHAPTER IV.
Hereditary Transmission and Predisposition.
T HERE is as little consensus of opinion as to the heredi-
tary transmission of leprosy from parent to offspring
as there is with regard to the contagiousness of the disease.
It is not necessary to enumerate the views of the various
authors, and only a few references need be made. Dr. Liveing 1
inclines to the belief in an hereditary predisposition rather
than an actual transmission of the disease, while Danielssen
and Boeck maintain that hereditary predisposition and trans-
mission are the chief causes of the perpetuation of the disease
in Norway. 2 It should be remarked that the latter authors
speak really of an actual hereditary transmission, and not of a
mere predisposition. Leloir 3 and Hansen, 4 on the other hand,
altogether deny the existence of such transmission or predis-
position. Hansen, as is well known, visited North America to
enquire into the condition of the Norwegian lepers who had
emigrated to that country. Out of 160 original emigrants he
found only seventeen alive, and not one of the descendants of
these 160 men had contracted leprosy. This fact is most
important. Turning now to Virchow 5 it is found that he says :
" The existence of an hereditary tendency has been admitted
in all ages and in all countries. " But he asserts distinctly
that only the predisposition, and not the disease itself, is tran-
smitted : " without special and specific external relations and
causes, the disease will not appear in the offspring of leprous
( 1 ) R. Liveing : Goulstonian Lectures for 1873 (Longmans, Green & Co.,
London, 1873), pages 84-87.
( 2 ) Danielssen and Boeck : Traité de la Spedalskhed. (Paris, 1848) : also R.
Liveing loc. cit., page 84.
( 3 ) H. Leloir : Traité Pratique de la Lèpre (Paris, 1886), pages 281—298.
( 4 ) A. Hansen : Virchow's Archives, Vol. CXIV., 3, 1888.
( 5 ) R. Virchow: Krankhafte Geschwülste, Vol. IL, pages 503—505.
Hereditary Transmission and Predisposition.
205
parents. " He continues : " If it be true that amongst the
lepers who emigrated from Norway to America the disease
has disappeared, then we must ascribe a very great importance
indeed to these external causes. " The proof of this has now
been given by Hansen. As regards leprosy in India, Dr.
Vandyke Carter, 6 in his well-known work, strongly urges the
spread of the disease through hereditary transmission ; and
Drs. Lewis and Cunningham, 7 in their report on Leprosy in
India, held " that the hereditary taint exercises a most import-
ant influence in the transmission of the pest. " However,
they never speak of an actual transmission of the disease, but
merely of a predisposition.
There can be no doubt that this difference of opinion is in
great part due to the fact that authors have not drawn a clear
enough distinction between " hereditary transmission of a dis-
ease" and " inherited predisposition to a disease." Even now
writers talk loosely of the inheritance of carcinoma and tuber-
culosis, while a predisposition is evidently all that can be
claimed. A second mistake, which apparently has been often
committed, is that, in their enquiries regarding the condition
of the parents, authors have been satisfied with merely ascer-
taining that the parent or parents were in a diseased condition.
But such information is clearly insufficient. In each case,
where family taint is possible as a legitimate ætiological factor,
it is necessary to enquire also into the time at which the
parent or parents were affected. If a child be born of parents
who acquire a disease some time after the birth of such child,
and the offspring eventually becomes affected also, we cannot
ascribe this to inheritance of a specific diseased condition.
Such condition can be transmitted to the offspring, only if
it were possessed by the parent before the. birth of the child.
Leloir lays particular stress on this point.
( 6 ) Vandyke Carter : On Leprosy and Elephantiasis, page 180.
( 7 ) T. R. Lewis and D. D. Cunningham : Leprosy in India, Calcutta, 1877.
2o6
REPORT OF THE LEPROSY COMMISSION:
Unfortunately, at the commencement of their investigations,
the Commissioners omitted to enquire closely into these cir-
cumstances. Thus it frequently happened at that time that
no question was asked as to whether or not the parent or
parents were healthy at the time of the child's birth. This, as
will be seen presently, must materially affect the statistical
results, and allowance should be made for this oversight.
However, in every case where no statement has been made
regarding the condition of the parent at the time of the birth
of the offspring, this has been taken as a case of genuine
transmission. Nevertheless, even with this admission, the
statistical results do not affect the conclusions arrived at by the
Commission, as will be fully explained later on.
After due consideration of all the evidence obtained by means
of an examination of over 2,000 cases, the Commissioners have
come to the conclusion that leprosy in India cannot be consi-
dered an hereditary disease', and they would even venture to say
that the evidence 'which exists is hardly sufficient to establish an
inherited specific predisposition to the disease by the offspring
of leprous parents to any appreciable degree. These deduc-
tions have been drawn from the following facts, which, as far as
the nature of the matter permits, will be given in tabular form.
Before proceeding-further a few general remarks should be
made on the subject of hereditary predisposition and transmis-
sion, and these will be illustrated by examples derived from the
knowledge of tuberculosis. Leprosy and tuberculosis resemble
one another in many respects, and the aetiology of the latter
disease has been more calmly and carefully considered.
Tuberculosis is essentially a disease of extra-uterine life, and
though hereditary in certain instances it is not so as a disease,
but as a predisposition. This assertion is not modified in
consequence of the two cases published by Landouzy and
Martin, Birch-Hirschfeld and Schmorl respectively. 8 For in
( 8 ) Supplement to the British Medical Journal, June 6th and 27th, 1891.