but had been hampered by medical opinions averse to its being of a serious character.

I submit some brief notes of a part of the cases that I saw.

1. Frank Washburne, age 5, on October 2d complained of sore throat in the morning, had nausea and fever in the afternoon, eruption began that night on the body, there was little on face. He is now desquamating, large flakes peeling from limbs and hands, and starting on feet; he pulled a "cot" from one finger while I was present Throat and nose quite sore.

2. Kate M Richards, age 9, taken two weeks ago, vomited once then lay about the house two or three days and complained of sore throat, mother does not know when she broke out, eruption was fine, only on chest, now feels rough but is not yet desquamating.

Two other children in this family had slight symptoms, some sore throat, the older a fine eruption all over, the younger only on back of neck.

3. Harry Bonney was taken two weeks ago with vomiting and high fever, eruption was not noticed till the third day. It was fine with intense redness all over body, not much on face, very sore throat, had much swelling of glands and wry neck, now desquamating, neck still stiff.

4. Straw boy, taken two weeks ago, got up in the morning feeling sick and returned to bed, vomited and had high fever, throat sore, eruption appeared next morning it was fine with intense redness of skin, first on body but extended to cheeks and forehead. Now desquamating, pale and weak.

5. Hudson boy was taken with sore throat, vomiting, quite high fever, no eruption. He is supposed to have had scarlet fever when small. Sister was taken about a week later with same symptoms, a fine rash appeared in a few hours over body, not on face. Not yet desquamating, but skin is rough and looks likely to throw off scales.

I saw a good many others, some having had very little eruption or none at all, all having had fever and sore throat, and nearly every case beginning with vomiting. Several of the parents had had sore throat and a feverish condition.

Doubtless all these cases depended upon one and the same poison, and I have no hesitation in saying that it was that of scarlet fever. Although several of the cases, taken alone, would have furnished

no conclusive proof of their nature, there were enough quite typical cases to establish the diagnosis with absolute certainty.

Given an eruptive disease of children, the diagnosis lies between measles, German measles, and scarlet fever. The points relied upon for diagnosis, were as follows:

1. It began with fever and vomiting, followed by rash withinexcept in one case-twenty-four hours; in measles the rash would not appear until the fourth day, while in German measles there would be no fever previous to the eruption.

2. The eruption began on the body and rarely extended to the face, never occurring about the mouth;-in both measles and German measles the eruption is on the face from the first.

3. The eruption consisted of fine points, with redness of the intervening skin at first; characteristic of scarlet fever, and entirely different from that of the other diseases.

4. Desquamation followed in many cases; this does not occur in the other diseases, except a very limited branny desquamation in German measles when vesicles have formed. That found in these cases was characteristic.

5. The sore throat consisted of simple redness of the fauces and palate; that of measles and German measles, when present, is in the form of a coarse eruption, somewhat like that on the skin, extending to the hard palate.

Although the contagion is widely disseminated through the village, I believe the local board of health will now, supported by the authority of the State Board, be able to control its further spread. They are entitled to great credit for the energy with which they have grappled with the problem of its control, notwithstanding the unfortunate way in which they have been hampered in their action.

Yours truly,

J. O. WEBSTER, M. D,
Member of the Board.

According to information received from the Secretary of Guilford the outbreak lasted about six weeks after the visit of Dr. Webster, and he thinks that six or eight new cases occurred, but as they were not willingly reported there might have been a larger

number.

WATER ANALYSIS.

The demand for analyses of samples of water and for advice as to the suitability for drinking purposes of private and public supplies, present and prospective, has continued as hitherto, and as much work as has been practicable has been done in this direction. In the summer and fall the work on the State House extension interrupted the laboratory work considerably. The whole number of samples examined during the year is 96, of which fifty-nine were from wells, eighteen from springs, one from a cistern, five from public water supplies, thirteen from proposed sources of public water supplies, and two from samples of ice. Two samples of spring waters included in the foregoing are classified also as proposed public water supplies

The examination of samples of water is a work voluntarily assumed by the Secretary in 1887, with the approval of the Board. The examinations are willingly made, as far as the other work in the office will permit, and when there appear to be good reasons for requesting them. In addition to the lack of time always to attend to every examination as soon as the request is received, there has been the disadvantage of insufficient room to permit all the conveniences desired. This trouble it is believed will be obviated after the removal of the office into the new quarters assigned to it, one room of which is designed as the office for general work, and the other as the laboratory.

Circular No. 55 gives some information useful to those who contemplate sending samples. It reads as follows:

"TO APPLICANTS FOR WATER ANALYSES :-The general work in the office of the Secretary of the State Board of Health necessarily takes precedence of the work of water analysis, therefore a delay in reporting results is sometimes a necessity. Where there appears to be a need of it, report is made at the earliest practicable moment. "Notify this office when you wish to send samples, and bottles for that purpose will be sent in packing boxes. Samples sent without previous notification are almost invariably unsuitable and are necessarily thrown out without examination. Bottles are sent out free by express. Applicants must prepay return express charges. "The analyses of samples of water ordinarily made require about half a day for each, and, in the doing of our somewhat routine

work in the examination of waters for the purpose of learning whether they contain polluting or other matters unfitting them as drinking waters, we always have rather have rather more than we ought to do with the other work in the office. As the analysis of samples for the purpose of determining their medicinal qualities would take much more time, we were obliged to draw a line and exclude all this kind of work, and therefore, the laboratory has never been fitted up for it. If, therefore, the object in sending samples is to have their medicinal qualities determined, we shall be unable to do the work for you.

"If the object of the application is help in the choice of a public water supply, we would advise, by all means, the sending of more than a single sample from each place of collection. The quality of the water furnished by some sources of supply, or proposed sources, varies much at different seasons and during different sorts of weather. When practicable to do so, it is better to extend the examinations over as many months as possible, preferably a whole year, making arrangements to send samples every one or two months."