were so filled with inaccuracies and omissions. As it is now the causes of deaths as returned by the undertakers, are grotesque to say the least, and are not in the least to be depended upon where correctness is essential, as in cases of pension claims, etc.

"In all cases of births, deaths and marriages, the names of parents should be given in order to establish connection of families. This is so seldom done now, except in cases or births-and even in those with such inaccuracy as to occasion much trouble-that it is of very little service.

"That portion of the law requiring returns to be made by heads of families is of no use whatever, with one exception which I will speak of later. In the first place so many heads of families are quite unable to make any returns; they cannot write, and to make a verbal return at the office would be quite too much to expect and almost impracticable.

2d. To many who can write, the filling out of never so simple a form is a work whose magnitude appals them.

3d. These broad provisions of the law requiring returns from so large a class never are effective, especially where these provisions are not subject to police supervision.

"The one exception in returns by heads of families to which I have referred, is this:

Our records of 20 to 40 years ago are very imperfect. In making out claims, we often fail to find any records. As the law does not limit the time in which returns may be made, it is legal even at this lapse of time for the heads of families to make returns, have them recorded, and thus secure, for their legal use, certified copies of the record.

"The necessity of an accurate and careful collection of births, deaths and marriages, for the purposes of comparison of growth or the prevalence of any causes which retard or promote the growth of a community, seems to me so self-evident that argument is almost unnecessary."

Some of the most cogent reasons for the desired plan have come to us from a gentlemen of wide experience as a civil engineer, particularly interested in sanitary work, whose belief is thus expressed:

"There is a certain practical value in vital statistics that ought to appeal to everyone. The State Board and Local Board of Health are organizations to disseminate health laws. They are the authorities first appealed to when communities or individuals realize that

their health is being endangered by the ignorant and wilful acts of other communities or individuals. The tracts that they are constantly putting in circulation are such as these:

"Health is the capital of the laboring man.' 'Wealth is the income from the work which is the outcome of health.' 'Pure air, pure water and a pure soil;' and a paraphrase of the old penny and pounds' proverb recently uttered by the most eminent sanitarian in the world; 'take care of the health rate and the death rate will take care of itself.' Now what is the death rate of this or that place in the State of Maine? Certain sections are considered valuable because the land is fertile; because a water power makes manufacturing interests profitable; because the location is a favorable one for the transshipment of goods, etc., etc.; and such places become more or less thickly settled. Observing and progressive individuals, students of the causes of disease, insist upon the necessity of carrying out certain sanitary reforms; better drainage and sewerage. Agitation of the subject goes on, an engineer skilled in the solution of such problems is employed, and estimates are made of the expense of a remedy for the ascribed difficulties. The amount seems large to the tax payer and he claims that the value of or the necessity for such work is not proven to his satisfaction. It does not seem to appeal to him personally when reports of vital statistics kept in England are quoted showing that sanitary reform-principally sewerage schemes-has lowered the death rate in the city of London, or that there are 10,000 less deaths and 200,000 less cases of sickness than were wont to occur each year a comparatively short time ago.

"The experiences of a dozen places foreign to his own State may be quoted showing the lessons that may be learned from a study of the vital statistics, and yet he remains unconvinced because it is not brought home to him that his city or village has five more deaths and a hundred more cases of sickness each year for every 1,000 inhabitants than his neighboring city which has spent money to obtain pure water by an outside water supply, pure air by abating local nuisances, and a pure soil by a system of sewerage. A table showing the death and sickness rate of every locality is absolutely necessary as a guide to the class of work needed. A glance at it shows whether a town has been faithful to its own interests, words of approval of good work stand out all over it, and danger and warning signals are conspicuous if negligence exists. Nothing appeals to the people like the money value of things. If a glance at a table of

vital statistics shows the people of a city of 10,000 inhabitants that they are less well off than a neighboring city at the end of a year by the loss of the labor that fifty people would have performed, but that death seizes them, and also by the loss of labor and money incidental to 1,000 more cases of sickness, think you then a committee would not visit the other city and bring back the receipe of sanitary reform?

"Repeatedly I have known towns to delay or put off entirely very necessary reforms, simply because the data of death and disease along the borders of a foul mill pond in their midst, or those of a coast line of exposed areas of flats covered with sewerage, could not be compared with localities either naturally free from such influences or by sewerage facilities made so.

"Give us vital statistics, and health boards and sanitary engineers can tell when, where and how to act."

SECRETARY'S REPORT.

In reporting on the work of he State Board of Health for the year 1889, it should be said in the beginning that a large part of the work of the office has been devoted to securing, under the existing laws, as complete and efficient a sanitary organization of the whole State as possible. The amount of local sanitary work required of a board of health varies much, of course, with the density of population in the community or town, and with the character and condition of the people; but even in our sparsely populated agricultural towns, where, in average years, there is but little work to be done, there is a real need of the presence of an intelligent local board of health, who, whether they have before been called upon to take charge of an outbreak of infectious disease or not, have, nevertheless, received in advance printed instructions from the State Board of Health in regard to managing accidents of this kind, and are, therefore, tolerably well prepared to act promptly, intelligently and efficiently. On account of the close business relations of the rural parts of the State with the larger centres of population, the importation of infectious diseases into these more sparsely settled parts is at any time liable to occur, and how likely to occur may be judged by referring to the statement in the "Introductory" in regard to the number of towns in which outbreaks of infectious diseases were reported. But aside from the necessity of the smaller towns protecting their own inhabitants from the disastrous consequences of neglected infection, there is a question of intermunicipal obligation and equity. If a larger town incurs the expense of controlling, as efficiently as practicable, the infectious diseases, it is doing work, primarily in its own interest, and secondarily, in the interest of every other town and the whole State; and in so doing it lays every other town under obligations to take like precautions, to do its part, though its part be small. To how

great a degree the efforts of the local boards of health of the cities may be rendered futile, may be inferred from a consideration of the fact that the aggregate of the rural population of the State is numerically much greater than that of the cities and larger villages.

The names and addresses of the members of the Board at the end of the year with the dates at which their terms of office expire are as follows:

HON. LEWIS BARKER, Bangor, term expires January 31, 1890. CHARLES D. SMITH, M. D., Portland, term expires January 31,

1891.

J. O. WEBSTER, M. D., Augusta, term expires January 31, 1892. E. C. JORDAN, C. E., Portland, term expires January 31, 1893. O. A. HORR, M. D., Lewiston, term expires January 31, 1894. PROF. F. C. ROBINSON, Brunswick, term expires January 31, 1895. At the expiration of the term of office of Hon. Stephen J. Young, Prof. F. C. Robinson of Bowdoin College, Brunswick, was appointed by the Governor to fill the vacancy. In October, Dr. F. H. Gerrish who had, ever since the establishment of the Board, held the office of President, felt compelled by the demands of his professional work to sever his official connection with the Board. Accordingly, he sent in his resignation, and Dr. C. D. Smith of Portland was appointed to fill the unexpired term. At the quarterly meeting of the Board in January the following resolution was voted:

Resolved, That the members of the State Board of Health feel keenly the loss which both they and the State have suffered by the resignation of Dr. F. H. Gerrish, their President. A pioneer in sanitary matters in the State, he brought to the work of the Board all the enthusiasm for which he is celebrated, and we feel that any good which the Board has done is largely due to his unselfish labors in its behalf.

At the same meeting the election of President to fill the vacancy due to the resignation of Dr. Gerrish was by vote postponed to the annual meeting to be held in March, and Dr. Webster was chosen President pro tem. At the annual meeting in March, 1889, the following committees were appointed for the ensuing year:

On Finance-The Hon. Lewis Barker, J. O. Webster, M. D., and the Secretary.