(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Children's Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Monthly Bulletin of the State Board of Health of Massachusetts"



Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2012 with funding from 

Boston Library Consortium Member Libraries 



http://archive.org/details/monthlybulletino04mass 



_J 



JUL l^iaiu 



STATE LiBRAR]#MASSACH!J;>ETTS, 

MONTHLY III BULLETIN 



OF THE 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH 



OF 



MASSACHUSETTS; 



An official publication of the State Board of Health of Massachusetts, issued monthly 
from the office of the Board, 141 State House, Boston, Mass. 



New Series. JANUARY, 1909. Vol. 4. No. 1. 



Entered at the Post-office at Boston, Feb. 15, 1906, as Second-class Matter. Act 

of July 16, 1894. 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. 



HENRY P. WALCOTT, M.D., CAMBRIDGE, Chairman. 



JULIAN A. MEAD, il.D. W"ATE(tr*WN. ; 
HIRAM F. MILLS, C.L., L utRENCE,., j 
GERARD C. TOBEY, Esq., Wareham., > , 



■ , JAMES W,- HULL, PlTTSFIELD. 
CirAbM.FS H. PORTER, QUINCT. 
ROBERT W. LOVETT, M.D., Boston. 



: iVii.niv W.MCUVti^ON, M.lv., $ecr\tdry. 



BOSTON 
WRIGHT & POTTER PRINTING CO., STATE PRINTERS 
18 Post Office Square 
1909. 



*, 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



Pack 

Weekly returns of deaths from cities and towns of more than 10,000 population, . 3 

Weekly returns of deaths from certain infectious diseases, 8 

Weekly returns of cases of infectious diseases, 9 

Monthly report on inspection of food and drugs, 10 

Prosecutions for violations of the law relating to food and drugs, .... 11 

List of adulterated foods, etc., for January, 1909, 12 

Inspection of dairies, . 13 

Vaccination, 14 

Quarterly Puhlications of the American Statistical Association, December, 1908, . 16 



no 6 } 

WEEKLY RETURNS OP DEATHS FROM CITIES AND TOWNS 
OP MORE THAN 10,000 POPULATION. 

-7*r 

Week ending Jan. 2, 1909. 



Total of reporting towns, 





a 


c 


> 




DEATH* 


PROM — 




1 




u 

9 












• ^ 


•-i 






£ 




CITIES AND TOWNS. 


o 1 - 
a <y 


■o 




»2 


11 a 


= . 

3 2 
►J » 


j 




- 
> 
p 


,; 




is 


C Si 


— v 


111 




3 




p. 


- 




b 


SS 


a 


£ 


■< 


■-. 


a 


H 


SE 


Boston, . ' . 


624,491 


227 


63 


91 


47 


30 


5 


1 


Worcester, 








136,476 


31 


4 


9 


4 


4 


- 


- 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


52 


30 


19 


16 


:; 


- 


- 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


26 


9 


16 


11 


3 


- 


1 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


39 


9 


12 


9 


2 


- 


- 


- 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


33 


14 


15 


9 


2 


2 


- 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


24 


8 


6 


- 


4 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


24 


6 


10 


4 


2 


2 


1 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


30 


13 


9 


3 


- 


2 1 


3 


Somerville, 








76,049 


25 


8 


10 


6 


3 


1 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


6 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


9 


5 


3 


1 


- 


1 


- 


1 


Maiden, • 








41,941 


9 


2 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


9 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


14 


1 


3 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


20 


6 


8 


5 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


8 


1 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


13 


4 


4 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


7 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, i 








31,937 


5 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton , . 








30,967 


11 


2 


6 


5 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


8 


3 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


9 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


10 


2 


3 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


9 


2 












North Adams, 








22,150 


2 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


2 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


5 


3 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


5 


- 


2 


o 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


5 


- 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


3 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


3 

















Melrose, 








15,459 


5 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Newhuryport, 








14,834 


6 


- 


3 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, • 








14,522 


2 

















Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


1 

















Attleborough, 








13,913 


4 

















Adams, 








13,685 


2 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


4 





2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


3 


2 














Milford, 








12,722 


4 


1 














Watertown, 








12,'676 


o 


1 














Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


3 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11.798 


3 





1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


4 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


5 


1 


1 


1 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 






10,140 


_ 


- 


- 


— 


" 





Recapitulation. 



2,369,328 



733 



212 



257 



137 



71 



16 



6 



i The populations were estimated upon the rate of srrowth from 1900 to 1905. Those of Taunton . 
Gloucester, North Adams and Clinton were allowed to stand as in 1905, having shown no increase 
during the five-year period. The gain in the population of Lowell is due to the annexation ot a 
part of the town of Tewksbury. The population of Lawrence by the census of 1905 was . '. 60, out. 
owing to the building: of the new Wood and Arlington mills, an increase of about $,000 ib estimated 
by the Lawrence board of health, or 78,000. 



Wkek ending Jan. 9, 1909. 





d) 


= 


I 




Deaths 


fBOM — 








u 
3 












• jp, 


s» 






u 




CITIES AND TOWNS. 


is 

5 -3 


•o 


•a 


"3 


Si 




o 


> 
a 






A 11 


■2j3 




S.O m 






X3 












.C cs 
















"35 




2^ 




s^ 






a, 


3 




*- 


M 


Q 


£ 


< 


- 


s 


H 


S 


Boston 


024,491 


286 


59 


108 


62 


::4 


3 


1 




Worcester, 








136,476 


48 


12 


21 


13 


:. 


2 


_ 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


61 


31 


34 


20 


8 


1 


_ 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


28 


13 


15 


11 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


39 


12 


11 


4 


5 


1 


_ 


_ 


New Bedford, . 








85,516 


32 


20 


13 


11 


- 


1 


- 


1 


Lynn,. 








84,623 


19 


3 


4 


- 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


Springfield, 








84,237 


18 


3 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


34 


15 


15 


11 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Somerville, 








76,049 


27 


9 


8 


3 


2 


1 


_ 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


13 


4 


1 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


11 


3 


4 


3 


1 


- 


_ 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


9 


3 


4 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


12 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39.642 


8 


2 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


_ 


Salem, 








39,019 


20 


3 


7 


3 


4 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


15 


2 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, . 








34,263 


7 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


8 


2 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


11 


3 


4 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


8 


3 


4 


4 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


8 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Pittstield, . 








27,932 


10 


3 


6 


3 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Brook line, . 








26,674 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


10 


2 


3 


- 


- 


2 


- 


_ 


North Adams, 








22,150 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


8 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


7 


4 


4 


1 


2 


- 


1 


- 


Med ford, . 








20,921 


6 


- 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


4 


- 


i 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


9 


4 


:; 


1 


1 


- 


_ 


1 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


4 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


2 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,s:u 


5 


1 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 





- 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


3 


_ 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


2 


1 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Peabody, . 








14.512 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14.456 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


— 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,91:; 


1 





- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


4 


1 


2 


_ 


2 


_ 


_ 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 





- 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


4 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, 








12,722 


7 


1 


3 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


5 





_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


6 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


6 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 




- 


_ 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Arlington, 








10,520 





- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


field, 






10,140 


2 


- 


1 


- 




- 


- 


- 



>[ reporting towns, 



Recapitulation. 



I I 836 235 2'. iT 



173 75 15 









Week ending Jan 


. 16, : 


1909. 














■£ 


8 







Dkatiis 


PROM — 




w§ 


a 


z 










CITIES AND TOWNS. 


OS 

si 

o V-. 




a 


S 2 






* 


- 






53* 

la 


t? -> 

2 a 




"a 2 
Q.09 

■SJ83 


£5 


| 



a 


-r- 

3 
% 






c- 


SJ 


a 


£ 


< 


- 


- 


P 


3E 


Boston, 


624,491 


231 


62 


108 


53 


23 


7 


2 


1 


Worcester, 










136,476 


35 


5 


15 


7 


6 


_ 


_ 




Fall River, 










106,486 


47 


23 


28 


23 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Cambridge, 










102,112 


30 


8 


10 


9 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Lowell, 










96,380 


41 


17 


20 


9 


7 


1 


1 


_ 


New Bedford, 










85,516 


34 


12 


14 


6 


4 


1 




_ 


Lynn, . 










84,623 


23 


6 


3 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Springfield, 










84,237 


26 


6 


11 


6 


4 


1 


_ _ 


Lawrence, . 










78,000 


23 


7 


8 


4 


3 


_ 


- 1 


Somerville, 










76,049 


22 


6 


8 


4 


2 


2 


_ 


Brockton, . 










55,039 


14 


4 


5 


2 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


Hoi yoke, . 










53,590 


23 


9 


6 


3 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


Maiden, 










41,941 


8 


1 


1 


- 


1 




_ 


_ 


Chelsea, 










40,080 


18 


6 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Newton, 










39,642 


7 


1 


3 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Salem, 










39,019 


12 


1 


3 


2 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


Haverhill, . 










38,362 


11 


3 


5 


1 


1 


3 


_ 


_ 


Fitchburg, 










34,263 


11 


6 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Everett, 










33,597 


7 





2 


- ■ 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


Quincy, 










31,937 


6 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 










30,967 


11 


3 


3 


1 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


Waltham, . 










28,761 


4 


1 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Pittsfield, . 










27,932 


12 


2 


3 


2 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Brookline, . 










26,674 


4 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Gloucester, 










26,011 


l> 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


North Adams, 










22,150 


4 


4 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Northampton, 










21,075 


4 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 










21,049 


11 


6 


4 


2 


2 


- 


- 


_ 


Medford, . 










20,921 


10 


2 


3 


2 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


Beverly, 










16,386 


8 


3 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Leominster, 










16,030 


6 


- 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Hyde Park, 










15,609 


6 





1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 










15,459 


2 


1 


2 


2 


_ 


- 


_ _ 


Newburyport, 










14,834 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 




- _ 


Revere, 










14,820 


3 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


— 


_ 


_ 


Westfield, . 










14,750 


4 


1 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


- 


_ 


Woburn, . 










14,522 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 










14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 










14,456 


4 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 










13,913 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 










13,685 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 










13,105 


5 


1 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 










13,066 


9 


1 


1 


1 




- 


- 


- 


Mil ford, . 










12 722 


1 





1 


1 




- 


- 


_ 


Watertown, 










12^676 


5 


3 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 










12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 










11,848 


4 


2 


3 


- 


1 


1 


1 


- 


"Weymouth, 










11,798 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 










. 11,749 


2 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 










11,124 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 










11,109 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 










10,520 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 










10,140 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


- 


~ 


_ 



Recapitu lation . 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,379,468 763 221 



283 150 64 20 



6 



Week ending Jan. 23, 1909. 





* 


£ 


> 




DEATH8 


FROM — 




«8 


£ 


E 










OITIEB AND TOWNS. 


c3 


u 

c 


"a 


bo 

c 

3 ■ 




a 


> 
m 












s ° ■ 


ti 2 






gfc 








— a 




Co « 






c 








"a ~ 


o ° 


£ S 


o'f « 


a » 


jc 


a 


£ 


9} 




&a 


&a 


g* 


« aj « 

"EC o> 


go 


S 


o, 


a 


OS 

o 




i. 


K 


s 


£ 


< 


6. 


fi 


H 


3 


Boston, 


624,491 


226 


64 


101 


42 


30 


4 


4 - 


Worcester, 








186,476 


30 


4 


8 


3 


1 


- 


1 - 


Fall River, 








106,486 


33 


15 


6 


- 


2 


- 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


34 


7 


10 


3 


3 


2 


- 


Lowell, 








96,880 


32 


9 


11 


7 


4 


- 


- 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


25 


11 


8 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


28 


12 


5 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


21 


2 


6 


3 


2 


- 


1 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


81 


12 


16 


5 


6 


- 


1 


3 


Somerville, 








76,049 


13 


6 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


15 


7 


9 


6 


1 


- 


- 


1 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


16 


9 


4 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


7 


2 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


8 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


5 


- 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


13 


1 


4 


2 


2 


- 


_ 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


9 


- 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Fitchtmrg, . 








34,263 


15 


2 


4 


1 


2 


1 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


7 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


10 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


14 


7 


6 


6 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


4 


2 


2 


2 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


8 


2 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


5 


1 


3 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


9 


- 


4 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


3 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


4 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


8 


3 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


4 


- 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


4 


- 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


2 


- 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


5 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


2 


1 


o 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


3 


2 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


12 


6 


6 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


5 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, 








14,522 


4 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


4 


1 


3 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


6 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- - 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


4 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Mil ford, 








12 722 


1 





- 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12^676 


1 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


8 


3 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


1 


— 1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingbam, 








11.749 


5 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


- 


_ _ 


Webster, . 








11.109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- - 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


"| 


Recapt 


t ninth 


m. 










Total of reporting towns, 


2,379,468 


712 


209 


247 


113 


65 


11 7 


4 



Week ENDING Jan. 30, 1909. 





a 


= 


> 




DBATB1 


PROM — 




o 


i 

05 














i i 


CO 






t - 




CITIES AND TOWNS. 


Pa 


o 

•a 


-5 

c 
s 


•=3 

a = . 


a 


^ 


Z 








— <3 




■go 




2 ■ 

is 


J3 


c. 




= 




5 


M 


a 


£ 


< 


C- 


O 


ff 


S 


Boston, 


624,491 


234 


64 


72 


30 


21 


5 


1 


1 


Worcester, 








136,476 


41 


13 


8 


2 


5 


_ 






Fall River, 








106,486 


34 


12 


9 


3 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


25 


2 


7 


1 


4 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Lowell, 








96,380 


36 


13 


11 


9 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


43 


23 


26 


18 


5 


1 


_ 


_ 


Lynn, 








84,623 


21 


3 


4 


_ 


4 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Springfield, 








84,237 


22 


3 


6 


3 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


Lawrence, 








78,000 


25 


10 


9 


9 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Somerville, 








76,049 


18 


7 


11 


6 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


10 


2 


4 


2 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


19 


5 


9 


5 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Maiden, 








41,941 


11 


4 


4 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


11 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Newton, 








39,642 


10 


3 


5 


5 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Salem, 








39,019 


13 





3 


2 


_ 


1 


_ 


_ 


Haverhill, 








38,362 


17 


3 


6 


1 


3 


2 


_ 


_ 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


6 


3 


4 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


Everett, 








33,597 


10 


2 


2 


_ 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


Quincy, 








31,937 


8 


3 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


9 


3 


3 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


7 


1 


3 


2 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


8 





2 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


8 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


North Adams, 








22,150 


5 


3 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Northampton, 








21,075 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


7 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


6 


- 


2 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Beverly, . 








16,386 


4 


- 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


1 





- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


3 


1 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


7 


2 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


1 





1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


5 


2 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


3 


1 


1 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


1 


Milford, . 








12,722 


5 


2 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


1 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


- 


Plymouth, 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


6 


5 


3 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


2 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, . 








11,749 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, 








10,520 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield 


10,140 


3 


1 


3 


2 


~ 


— 




— 



Recapikdation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,366,363 



728 206 234 120 61 16 I 1 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CERTAIN INFECTIOUS 

DISEASES. 



Deaths from Infectious Diseases not specifically mentioned in 
Above Tables during the Weeks of January 2, 9, 16, 23 and 
30, 1909. 





Place. 


Week ending — 


DISEASE. 


Jan. 2. 


;jan. 9. 


Jan. 16. 


Jan. 23. | Jan. 30. 


Cerebro-spinal meningitis, 


Boston, 
Gloucester, . 
Hyde Park, 
New Bedford, 
Newburyport, 
Worcester, . 


1 


1 
1 


1 


1 

1 
2 


1 
1 


Scarlet fever 


Boston, 
Brockton, . 
Cambridge, 
Lawrence, . 
Lynn, . 
Lowell, 
Medford, . 
Milford. 
Somerville,. 
Waltham, . 
Weymouth, 


1 
1 

1 


2 

1 

1 
1 

2 
1 

1 


1 


3 

1 
2 

1 

1 


7 
1 

2 


Whooping cough, 


Boston, 
Cambridge, 
Chelsea, 
Fall River, . 
Gloucester, . 
Hyde Park, 
Lowell, 
Maiden, 
New Bedford, 
Salem, 


1 
1 

1 

_ 
1 


3 

1 

1 

- 


10 
1 

1 
1 


4 
2 
3 


2 
1 

1 


Meningitis, other than cerebro- 
spinal. 


Lynn, . 
Maiden, 
Medford, . 
Pittsfield, . 


1 


_ 


3 2 

1 

1 


1 


Tuberculosis, other than pulmo- 
nary. 


Greenfield, . 
Melrose, 
No. Adams, 
Springfield, 


1 


1 
1 


" 


1 


- 



9 









Week kmiixq — 


DISEASE. 


Place. 


Jan. 2. 


Jan. 9. 


Jan. 16. 


Jan. 23 


Erysipelas, .... 


Boston, 
Everett, 
Greenfield, .. 
Lowell, 
Lynn, . 
Melrose, 
New Bedford, 
Springfield, 
Worcester, . 


: 
I 


1 

1 


1 
1 

1 

2 


1 

1 
1 


1 

1 

1 


Influenza, 


Leominster, 
Medford, . 
No. Adams, 
Springfield, 


i 


- 


1 


1 


1 



WEEKLY RETURNS OP CASES OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES. 



Cases op Infectious Diseases reported during the Weeks of Jan- 
uary 2, 9, 16, 23 and 30, 1909. 

[Under the provisions of section 52 of chapter To of the Revised Laws.] 



Week ending — 



Diphtheria, .... 
Measles, ..... 

Scarlet fever 

Typhoid fever, .... 
Tuberculosis, pulmonary, 
Cerebro-spinal meningitis, 
Whooping cough, 

Varicella, 

Erysipelas, .... 

Mumps 

Meningitis other than cerebro-spinal 
Ophthalmia neonatorum, . 
Anterior poliomyelitis, 
Tuberculosis other than pulmonary, 
Smallpox, . . . 



254 

192 

235 

48 

155 

2 

105 

56 

1 

1 



207 
201 
256 

38 

146 

1 

79 
104 



212 

198 

35 

94 

1 
97 
70 



191 
281 
205 

31 

145 

3 

122 

72 



180 
327 

180 
32 

105 
1 

91 
77 

5 

1 



10 



MONTHLY REPORT ON INSPECTION OF FOOD AND DRUGS. 



The following summary presents the results of the examination of 
and drugs made by fche State Board of Health during the month of 
January, 1909: — 







Number 








Number 






Number 


adulterated 






Number 


adulterated 




Articles kxaminkd. 


found 

to be of 


or varying 
from the 


Total. 


Articles kxaminkd. 


found 
to be of 


or varying 
from the 


Total. 




i tood 
Quality. 


Legal 
Standard. 






Good 

Quality. 


Legal 
Standard. 




Baking powder, . 


1. 


_ 


1 


Maple syrup, 


1 


_ 


1 


Butter, . 


5 


- 


5 


Meat products : — 








Cheese, 


4 


- 


4 


Hamburg steak, 


27 


18 


45 


Cider, . 


4 


3 


7 


Sausages, . 


64 


15 


79 


Cocoa, . 


2 


- 


2 


Lambs' tongues, 


1 


- 


1 


Coffee, . 


3 


- 


3 


Pigs' feet, . 


2 


- 


2 


Confectionery, 


2 


- 


2 


Head cheese, 


4 


- 


4 


Condensed milk, . 


3 


- 


3 


Canned meats, . 


4 


- 


4 


Cream, . 


59 


5 


64 


Mince meat, 


1 


- 


1 


Cream of tartar, . 


4 


- 


4 


: Tripe, 


2 


- 


2 


Drugs, . 


61 


16 


77 


Milk, . 


233 


41 


274 


Extract of lemon, 


3 


- 


3 


Oysters, 


2 


- 


2 


Extract of vanilla, 


5 


1 


6 


Spices, . 


8 


- 


8 


Grape juice, . 


2 


- 


2 


Syrup, . 


1 


- 


1 


Honey, . 


1 


- 


1 


Table sauce, 


6 


- 


6 


Jams and jellies, 


6 


2 


8 


i Vinegar, 


18 


4 


22 


Lard, . , 
Malt liquor (ale), 


9 
3 




9 
3 










_ 


Total, . 


553 


105 


658 


Maple sugar, 


2 


— 


2 











The samples of drugs found to be adulterated were : olive oil, spirit 
of nitrous ether, spirit of camphor, tincture of iodine and several pro- 
prietary medicines. 

The cities and towns in which samples were collected, were : Adams, 
Andover, Ayer, Bedford, Boston, Brookline, Cambridge, Chicopee. Con- 
cord, Greenfield, Haverhill, Holyoke, Lawrence, Lowell, Lynn, Maiden, 
Marlborough, Melrose, Methuen, North Adams, New Bedford, Xorth 
Eeading, Reading, Shelburne, Springfield, Wakefield, Watertown. West- 
field, West Springfield, Weymouth and Worcester. 



11 



PROSECUTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW RELATING 
TO FOOD AND DRUGS. 



Sixteen convictions were secured during the month of January, 1909, 
for selling adulterated food, as follows : — 



No. 


Name of Defendant. 


Place. 


Character of Article sold. 


1 


Oscar Drew (Drew Brothers) , 


Boston, . 


Butter (renovated). 1 


2 


Oscar Drew (Drew Brothers) , 


Boston, . 




! Cider. 7 


3 


Albert J. Barney, 


New Bedford 




i Hamburg steak. 2 


4 


Benj F. Thoinas, 






Boston, . 




Hamburg steak. - 


5 


Uharles W . J^merson, 






Haverhill, 




Milk (total solids, 11.37). 


6 


Morris E. Field, . 






Greenfield, 




Milk (skimmed). 3 


7 


Duane H. Waller, 






Westford, 




Milk (total solids, 11.60). 


8 


Joseph Fortunate, 






Revere, . 




Milk (total solids, 11.47). 


9 


James H. Carr, 






Lowell, . 




Tomato catsup. 2 


10 


John R. Harris, . 






Lawrence, 




Tomato sausage. - 


11 


-fhillip W. Kounsewell, 




Boston, . 




Tomato sausage. 2 


12 


JPhillip W. Kounsewell, 




Boston, . 




Tomato sausage. 2 


13 


James Smith, 




Lowell, . 




Tomato sausage. 2 


14 


Frank R. Pease, . 




New Bedford 




Tincture iodine.' 1 


15 


A. Frank Clark, . 




New Bedford 




Vinegar. 4 


16 


William H. Wood, 




New Bedford 




Vinegar. 1 



1 Appealed. 

2 Contained a preservative. 



a Watered. 

4 Below standard. 



Pines imposed, $277. 



12 




P 
& 

<d 

1-3 

o 
6 

02 

P 

o 

O 

Ph 

R 
H 

H 
P 

ffl 
<J 
P 

>H 

P 

« 

P4 

o 

H 

o 

p 
p 

p 
p 
p 

<j 

& 
o 







<c 






m m m h • a a 


P 


p 


P 














03 03 53 * 4J — — 














p, 






*>««« C .P ,P 

C5 rt C! 65 aj o ZJ 


'3 


03 


'3 








o 






T3np^ 3 ^3 u C3 t3 


ci 


"3 

C3 


c3 








o 






03 03 aj 03 03 








3 






be 






'P'C-C'Pftj' 73 ^ 


13 


13 










as 






T3'Srr3T:_:*P P 














p 






eS bS S 08g!rt * ci 


65 


ci 


09 


_P 






o 






r P r Prr;^_^p»-t s^ 


14 


(4 


Si 


O 






o 






s>aio303„_6: 3 


C5 


CO 


ci 


> 






(4 






OX) 


be 


M 


.3 


00 










.r- — .p .P *» 03 g 

55 s 5^ a m W 


CO 


P 
00 


00 












CScC.-Et) r3 


13 


13 


13 


"o 


6j 

"3 




5 -a 






O O o O . .P 03 03 


03 

P 


CD 


03 





c 


"3 



















3 
o 


'5 


2 ° 






..•"**£ OS OS 

= "Sti-S Jp p 

o e J m K-O o 

g 3 u. s- a S .. 


O 


3 


O 


"ci 


3 


'3 


P 03 O 

m oo 






o 


O 


03 


3 


03 


a 
as 


a 

o . 

•T3 *C3 

03 C3 

.Sc 

05 -^ 

c & 
o o 




000^350^03 03 


03 


P 
03 


3 


u 
CD 




-P 


^■j?j= 




riJ — HC u « 


C3 


O 


C3 


10 






13 >T3 

> cs > 


2 

'3 

03 

o 


- • oT ^T m W O 03 

r 52« r § r ^'p .a, p< 

g g ° ° m '3 O'tl £J 

OOOOOftorWcS 


H 
03 

3 cc 

33 T-i 


t-i S-c 

03 03 

P. P4 

03 CC 03 CO 
r-CO r-C 


CN 

r-1 

^"^ 

03 03 

S P 




u 

03 
00 

a> 

til 


K 2 H 

as £ 03 
03 S tn 
® So ® 

Sh W Sh 


t4 CO 

03 

P 43' 
=0 63 


■J 


!-. CO 
2 03 


C3 £ 

z a 
00 © 




Ph 


PM PL, 


OJ 


Hi 


BhBHH fe fe 


&H 


N 


pq 









• 13 


- . 




s 










. . . . * -» 








a 


M 


















C3 






o 












a 


. 


P3 . 




• • • "T3 








r 






<s 






03 








00 




„ 


a 


03 




Ph 




00 




m 

03 


U 


GO 








. . . . tj 




00 

C3 


• 


a 


s 
•o 

o 

M 

0* 

o 


"3 

C3 

a 


13 
eS 

3 
- P-I 


P 
"? 

C5 • 

Ph 




03 

r © 

oc 03 

S i3 




■3 

CP 

OD 




p" 


00 


Ph 


o 


H 
P 


^ ft 

,« a 


c3 

a - 




m do - tn oo r 

CC 00 03 0C p 00 
63 65 O C5 B W 


00 

ci 

kH 


CC 


06 

CO 
63 


>5 

03 


tT 


oi 

ft 

a 

o 
O 


8* 


^ 
» 


03 03 Vj 03 r~ — i 


"3 

CR 


63 
P. 


"3 

CP 


a 



bfl 

P 

Ui 

O 
00 

"3 


•2 

5 
2 


OJO 

o 

03 


& a 


S3 
2>h 
"3* 


O 


SSa£ t " OX) 

ES '£|l "I 

- - f-, <— ' C5 P» 


P 


O 

O 

F4 

CD 


t4 

CO 

B 
O 

">. 
CD 


Ph 


3 o 


C <33 


03 


cu0>3 03 . M 02 


P 
03 

< 


p 


p 


o 

I 


Ph 

a 


03 ^T 

a '3 


S^ - 

65 _ a 


p" 


C 03 gnp p 

ot-H Pfcj 03 03 

5 p £ ET r 5 ^ 

O eS ci„ O 1 ^ u 
l-D'-l^rtSH fa 


C3 
CD 


s 


C3 


63 

O 

a 

aS 

H 


o ,p "s< cd P 

.2 H S . o 


P 
63 

a 

O 

'3 


O 

_c3 

a 
p 

"o 




[3 

'p 

63 

Q 


03 

M 

n 



_p 
H 




o 
+3 




CO 


03 









• 


<*-4 
O 


a. 

a 

as 

CO 

o 


c3 

a 

o 

CD 
4-3 
C3 
t-l 


03 

^1 05 
Dm > 
00 (h 
03 <g 

^ 03 
(h 

5 <- 

03 (h 


cfc3 
P 

03 « 
>65 

O q3 

u .p 


M 
CD 

.5 

03 
4= 03 


1 as 








03 
Q 

00^3 

p° 

c <* 
oc 03 

^ > 






O 03 






rt 03 03 








5 


p 

O 

p 
o 


•flag 

OH 03 65 
00 <£, •^-5_[2 


33 63 


S - - § § - a a 
a«oDBoa do 


a 

03 
03 

tH 


a 

03 
CD 
M 


a 

63 
CD 
U 


£ 




O 


: cq 


Phcc 


O 


O 


O 


Q 


•£-"3. 






a 


a 


Phcd 
cc cs fe; C75 « CO 01 








Ph 


o 


CO OS 

O CO 


cr. (M 


00 


05 


CO 


y-i 


iH 


O 01 


t- 


too 


o 


t- t- ^ rH CN ^t 


CO 


"* 


s 


I— 


g 


8 8 


WD l- 


t~ 


cs C3> co i— a o; 


CT3 


CT3 






00 Oi 


C33 


00 00 >C 00 CT 00 00 


00 


00 


Ci 


00 



13 



INSPECTION OP DAIRIES. 



During the month of January, 190!), 199 dairies were examined in the 

following places : — 



Number 
examined. 



Number found 

to present 

no Objectionable 

Features. 



Number to 

wbich Letters 

were sent. 



Gardner, 

Second inspection, 
Hubbardston , 

Second inspection, 
Marblehead, . 

Second inspection, 

Third inspection, 
Soutbwick, . 

Second inspection, 
Watertown, . 

Third inspection, 
Westfield, . 

Second inspection, 
Westford, 

Second inspection, 



7 

20 

6 

19 

1 

1 

2 

15 

12 

1 

27 
23 
18 

47 



6 
12 
1 
9 
1 
1 
1 
6 
3 

1 
3 



32 



85.71 
60.00 
16.67 
47.37 
100.00 
100.00 
50.00 
40.00 
25.00 

100.00 
11.11 
34.78 
44.44 
68.09 



1 

8 

5 

10 



24 
15 
10 
15 



14.29 
40.00 
83.33 
52.63 



50 00 
60.00 
75.00 



88.89 
65.22 
55.56 
31.91 



Total number of dairies examined, 199 

Number found to be free from objectionable conditions, 92 

Number to which letters were sent, 107 

Total number of conditions to which attention was called, 369 

Percentage of dairies which passed inspection, 46.23 



The names of the owners of dairies found to be worthy of commenda- 



tion follow: 



Brown, C. E. 1 , 3 

Clark, W. P. 1 

Fournier, Mrs. Charles H. 1 

Gardner Town Farm ' 

Gigger, E. G. 

Haywood, Mrs. Helen R. 1 , 2 



Gardner. 

Knight, W. E. 1 
Matson, William 
Miller, W. H. 
Nelson, Carl V 
Nissula, John 
Page, F. B. 1 



Pierce, F. J.', 2 
Rice, H. W. 
Ware Bros. 
Whitcomb, G. N. 1 
Wilder Farm * 
Wilson, Frank W. 1 , 



Brigkam, H. E. 1 
Olaflin, H. S. 1 , 2 
Clark, Warren 1 , 2 
Gleason, Estate of F. S. 1 , 2 



Bessom, Benjamin B. 1 , 2 



Hubbardston. 

Hayes, Frank P. 1 
Morse, George E. 1 
Savage, J. P. 1 



Marblehead. 

Martin Dairy Co. 



Tilton, Edgar V 
White. Royal A. 
Woodward, A. S.\- 



Sulliran, James 



i Second inspection. - Reported favorably on lirst inspection as well. a Third inspection. 



14 



Crane, Robert B. 
Curtis, Charles ' 
Fuller & Palmer 



Beckwith, E. E. 1 
Bull, Jonathan 
Fowler, Charles F. 1 ,'- 
Gruher, Joseph ' 



Brown, George l , 2 
Bunce, A. 1 
Burbeck, John ' 
Burnham, A. H. 1 
Colburn, Jonathan ' 
Collins, P. G.' 
Crossland, Samuel ' 
Day, George H. 1 
Decatur, William H. 1 
Desmond, David « 
Flagg, E. H.',' 
Fletcher, J. Henry ', 2 
Forster, O. A. 
Gregg, B. L. 1 



Southwick. 

Jackson, Fred G. 
Lamson, Marion 

Nash, Stephen 

Watertown. 
Howard, Henry M. 

Westfield. 

McElligott, John 
Noble, Wells ' 
Norton, L. D.' 
Pease, I. 

Westford. 

Griffin, Charles 
Haley, John 
Hartford, George ' 
Hildreth, Charles L.', : 
Howard, C. L.' 
Jenne, A. E. 1 
Kimball, George l 
LaDuke, John 
McDonald, Angus • 
McLeod, Donald, 1 
Mitchell, Victor ' 
Murphy, Henry ' 
Osgood, H. G. 1 



Palmer, Dwight J. 1 
Petersen, Carl 
Storey, W. E. 1 



Prout, Peter Sr. 1 
Stevens, George ' 
Thayer, William »,» 



Prescott, Richard 
Reid, H. B.' 
Shorey, H. E. 1 
Spalding, Oscar l 
Sweetser, J. F. 1 , 2 
Walkden, J. A.' 
Wentworth, G. A. 
Westford Town Farm ' 
Wheeler, L. W. 1 
Whitney, C. H. 1 
Whitney, Julian 
Wilson, James 
Wilson, T. Arthur E.» 



VACCINATION. 



In the " New York Medical Journal " for Jan. 16, 1909, appears a 
most valuable series of contributions upon vaccination in its medical 
and legal aspects. These articles by experts upon smallpox, Drs. Abbott, 
Welch and Schamberg, and Hampton L. Carson, Esq., were read at a 
meeting of the Philadelphia County Medical Society, Nov. 25, 1908, and 
are published most apropos, this being the season for the annual agitation 
against compulsory vaccination. The papers and their discussions are 
clear and forcible, and should carry conviction to all who approach the 
subject with an open mind. Smallpox is nowadays such a rare disease 
that it is difficult, if not impossible, for us of this place and generation 
to realize what a real scourge the disease has been. In this day. for 
instance, there are undoubtedly many young physicians who never saw 
a case of smallpox. In unvaccinated communities, however, the disease 



i Second inspection. 2 Reported favorably on first inspection as well. 3 Third inspection. 



15 

still raises its head and is responsible for many deaths. In thifi 
tion the experience of American sanitarians in the Philippines is of 
interest. Heiser, in the " Journal of the American Medical Association '' 
for Jan. 9, 1909, states that: "In the provinces near Manila, which 
represent a population of about a million, there were formerly 6,000 or 
more deaths from smallpox annually. Last year, after systematic vac- 
cination was completed, not one death occurred from smallpox." This 
remarkable result is typical of all well- vaccinated communities. 

Germany, for example, which has had since 1874 not only compulsory 
vaccination before the end of the first year of life, but also compulsory 
revaccination before the age of twelve, has suffered since that year not 
a single epidemic of smallpox. Prom 1893 to 1897 there were in the 
whole German empire only 287 deaths from smallpox. During the same 
period there died from smallpox in the Eussian empire 275,502 persons ; 
in Spain, 23,000; in Hungary, 12,000; in Austria and Italy, 11,000. 
In Philadelphia alone, from 1901 to 1905, 5,000 had the disease and 500 
persons died. There was no death of persons who had been successfully 
vaccinated within ten years. 

That smallpox has decreased remarkably in frequency during the past 
century the opponents of vaccination acknowledge ; but they ascribe the 
decrease to improvement in sanitary conditions, quite oblivious to the 
fact that while the mortality of smallpox was decreasing 72 per cent, 
that of measles fell only 9 per cent., whooping-cough 1 per cent, and the 
general mortality 9 per cent. Furthermore, a striking change in the age 
incidence of smallpox goes to prove the value of vaccination. Before 
vaccination, smallpox was a disease of children. Adults did not have 
it so commonly, because they had already passed through it in childhood, 
and were therefore immune. Now, conditions are reversed. Children 
fail to have the disease because they in general have been vaccinated once 
at least; adults have the disease because they fail to be revaccinated. 

As to the dangers of vaccination, they are practically nil, and, com- 
pared with the benefits conferred, not to be considered. Pure vaccine, 
applied and cared for with strict surgical cleanliness, will ensure good 
results. Bad results cannot be blamed upon the practice of vaccination 
as such. 

In its legal aspects Mr. Carson dealt with the question, "Whether, 
assuming that the Legislature after listening to the debate upon the 
propriety of safeguarding the public health by legislation enforcing com- 
pulsory vaccination adopts such a statute, such a statute is within the 
constitutional power of the Legislature, and whether it is free from the 
objection often urged, that it is an invasion of the personal liberty of 
the citizen." 



1(5 

" In every well-ordered community there exists a power generally 
iwd as the police power. . . . Every law for the restriction or pun- 
ishment of crime for the preservation of the public peace, health, morals, 
must conic within the limits of this power. . . . The Legislature cannot 
by any contract divest itself of the power to designate the objects over 
which the police power extends. ... In short, police power is an equiv- 
alent term for legislative power. . . . The police power is a broad and 
comprehensive power, by which the rights of an individual, both as to 
his liberty and his enjoyment of property, may be curtailed in the in- 
terest of the public welfare." 

" Is the exclusion from the public schools of children who have not 
been vaccinated a valid exercise of the police power of a State ? " Such 
an exercise of power comes under " cautionary and prospective legislation, 
having in view not the actual presence of the disease, but its appearance 
in the future." 

The constitutionality of the exercise of this power is thus declared 
by the supreme court of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania, like Massachusetts, 
has no law making vaccination compulsory, except in this indirect man- 
ner, which, as Mr. Carson well states, " seems to bring about the loss of 
education at the expense of the State." 



QUARTERLY PUBLICATIONS OP THE AMERICAN STATIS- 
TICAL ASSOCIATION, DECEMBER, 1908. 



OCCUPATION MOETALITY STATISTICS OP SHEFFIELD, 
ENGLAND, 1890-1907. 

By P. S. Crum. 

The annual reports of the Medical Officer of Health of Sheffield, Eng- 
land, have long been of special interest and value because they have 
contained occupation mortality data. This fact in itself is sufficient to 
mark the reports as being unique, for mortality by occupation is very 
rarely included in the health reports of England or any other country. 
Sheffield being an important center for the manufacture of cutlery and 
files, many nun are employed there as cutlers, grinders, tool makers, file 
irs, He and the occupation statistics are of special value because 
they throw considerable light upon certain trades which are health- 
injurious. 

The present report, like those for many previous years, contains the 
tabulated mortality returns for all of the important occupations. The 



17 



industries of special importance, however, are those already ally 

mentioned. The following table, found on page xi of the report 
1907, will indicate in a rough way the effect of certain occupations on 
mortality, and particularly their effect on the mortality from certain 
causes of death : — 



Average Mortality in Sheffield from All Causes and from Phthisis awl Diseases of 
the Respiratory Organs during the Three Years, 1905, 1900 and 1907, in 
Certain Dusty Trades, and among All Males over Twenty Years of Age. 



TRADE. 


Males over 
20 Years of Age 
(Estimated Pop- 
ulation). 


Averagk Death-rates peb 1,000 Living. 


All Causes. 


Phthisis. 


Inspiratory 
Diseases. 


Grinders, . 

File-cutters, .... 

Silver, etc., workers, 

All males, .... 


3,375 
2,500 
1,850 
2,380 
127,000 


34.2 
40.8 
32.1 
26.9 
16.2 


16.3 
7.2 
4.5 
5.5 
2.6 


5.7 
8.4 
5.4 
4.9 
2.1 



This table would have been more useful if it had been given by divi- 
sional periods of life, but even in its present form it is suggestive of the 
baneful effect on health of certain trades which expose the workmen 
to mineral and metallic dust. The mortality rate from all causes is 
shown to have been more than double the expected rate for grinders and 
cutlers, and excessive for file cutters and other metal goods workers. 
The mortality from phthisis was more than six times as high for grinders 
as for all males, and very much in excess also among the other metal 
workers. The mortality from respiratory diseases was four times as 
high for cutlers as for all occupied males, and considerably in excess 
among other metal workers. 



MONTHLY m BULLETIN 



OF THE 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH 



OF 



MASSACHUSETTS. 



An official publication of the State Board of Health of Massachusetts, issued monthly 
from the office of the Board, 141 State House, Boston, Mass. 



New Series. FEBRUARY, 1909. Vol. 4. No. 2. 



Entered at the Post-office at Boston, Feb. 15, 1906, as Second-class Matter. Act 

of Jult 16, 1894. 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. 



HENRY P. WALCOTT, M.D., CAMBRIDGE, Chairman. 



JULIAN A. MEAD, M.D., Watertown. 
HIRAM F. MILLS, C.E., LAWRENCE. 
GERARD C. TOBEY, ESQ., Wareham. 



JAMES W. HULL, Pittsfield. 
CHARLES H. PORTER, QUINCY. 
ROBERT W. LOVETT, M.D., BOSTON. 



MARK W. RICHARDSON, M.D., Secretary. 



BOSTON 
WRIGHT & POTTER PRINTING CO., STATE PRINTERS 
18 Post Office Square 
1909. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



Page 

Weekly returns of deaths from cities and towns of more than 10,000 population, . 21 

Weekly returns of deaths from certain infectious diseases, 25 

Weekly returns of cases of infectious diseases, . 26 

Monthly report on inspection of food and drugs, 27 

Prosecutions for violations of the law relating to food and drugs, .... 28 

List of adulterated foods, etc., for February, 1909, 29 

Inspection of dairies, 30 

The infantile mortality of Boston during the period June 1 to Nov. 30, 1907, . . 31 

Infant mortality and its intimate relation with the milk supply, .... 33 
Report of the State Board of Health upon the sanitary condition of the Merrimack 

River, . 35 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CITIES AND TOWNS 
OF MORE THAN 10,000 POPULATION. 



Wkkk ending Feb. 6, 1909. 





J3 


s 


* 
> 




Dbatbi 


FROM — 




"S 


£ 


s 










CITIES AND TOWNS. 


55 




u 

-3 
C 


~£ 






* 


-- 
> 






— ■3 


■a 


"* » 


2 3 . 




^ 


m 


»* 


j 






tt-g 

S « 




I* 8 


— 'C 




a 

A 
s. 


o 
.= 
a 


3 
- 




0* 


BS 


a 


< 




C 


- 


7. 


Boston 


624,491 


207 


47 


71 


29 


27 


5 


2 




Worcester, 








136,476 


41 


7 


11 


9 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Fall River, 








106,486 


45 


19 


18 


7 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


24 


6 


9 


7 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Lowell, 








96,380 


44 


17 


15 


7 


4 


3 


_ 


_ 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


23 


10 


13 


10 


_ 


1 


1 


_ 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


26 


4 


5 


_ 


2 


2 


1 


_ 


Springfield, 








84,237 


18 


3 


10 


7 


2 


1 


_ 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


30 


15 


11 


9 


2 


_ 


_ 


Sornerville, 








76,049 


22 


3 


10 


3 


5 


1 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


16 


7 


5 


3 


1 


- 1 - 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


23 


12 


6 


3 


1 


_ 


Maiden, 








41,941 


10 


3 


4 


2 


_ 


1 - - 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


8 


1 


1 


- 


1 


_ _ _ 


Newton, 








39,642 


8 


1 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Salem, 








39,019 


13 


5 


2 


2 


_ 


_ _ 


_ 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


11 


1 


5 


1 


4 


_ : _ 


_ 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


8 


2 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Everett, 








33,597 


5 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


6 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


15 


5 


5 


4 


- 


_ 


_ 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


2 


1 










Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


6 


1 


3 


1 


- 


1 1 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


8 


- 


3 


2 


- 


1 - - 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


5 


1 


1 


- 


- 


1 - - 


North Adams, 








22,150 


10 


2 


5 


1 


2 


- - 


Northampton, 








21,075 


5 





1 


- 


1 


_ _ 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


6 


4 


2 


2 


- 


_ 


Medford, . 








20,921 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Beverly, 








16,386 


4 


- 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


Leominster, 








16,030 


5 


2 








- - I - 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


3 













Melrose, 








15,459 


3 


1 


2 


2 


- 


- - - 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


3 


. 2 


1 


1 


- 


1 - 


Revere, 








14,820 


4 


2 








- 1 - 


Westfield, . 








. 14,750 


4 


1 


1 


- 


1 


_ _ i _ 


Woburn, 








14,522 


4 





- 


_ 


_ 


- - 1 - 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


— ~ 1 — 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


6 


1 










Attleborough, 








13,913 


2 











_ _ I _ 


Adams, 








13,685 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


- 


_ _ _ 


Clinton, 








13,105 


2 


1 










Gardner, . 








13,066 


3 


1 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, 








12,722 


2 


1 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


1 















Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


1 















Framingham, 








11,749 


6 


2 


1 


1 


- 




- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster. . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


3 











- 




Greenfield, 




10,140 





- 


- 


- 


- 


_ _ 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,367,620 



704 



194 



232 



116 



61 



17 



1 The populations were estimated upon the rate of growth from 1900 to 1905. Those of Taunton, 
Gloucester, North Adams and Clinton were allowed to stand as in 1905, having shown no increase 
during the five-year period. The gain in the population of Lowell is due to the annexation of a 
part of the town of Tewksbury. The population of Lawrence by the census of 1905 was .0.050. but, 
owing to the building of the new Wood and Arlington mills, an increase of about 8,000 is estimated 
by the Lawrence board of health, or 78,000. 



22 









Week ending 


Feb. 


13, 1909. 














~ 


c 


> 




IlKATHS FBOM — 




5-2 


Q 


£ 

u 

a 










CITIES AND TOWNS. 


"5 


u 

c 




2 


4/ 

> 






33 "p 






« 3 


J S 


,/ 


V 


_u. 


ao 




§•9 




— 3 




a — ' 


1 


a 

a. 


'5 
j= 
c 


a 
- 




&i 


M 


Q 


£ 


< 


£ 


a 


fr- 


S 


Boston, 


624,491 


219 


48 


90 


40 


27 


4 


1 


_ 


Worcester, 








136,476 


42 


10 


8 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


41 


17 


19 


9 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Cambridge, . . 








102,112 


30 


10 


12 


4 


5 


- 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


37 


7 


17 


8 


8 


- 


- 


- 


New Bedford, . 








85,516 


37 


18 


11 


8 


- 


2 


- 


- 


Lynn,. 








84,623 


36 


7 


8 


- 


3 


1 


- 


1 


Springfield, 








84,237 


22 


8 


7 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


32 


15 


15 


8 


4 


2 


- 


- 


Somerville, 








76,049 


19 


3 


4 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


13 


4 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


11 


3 


7 


2 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


8 


2 


4 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


10 


1 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


8 


- 


2 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


8 


1 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


15 


2 


4 


1 


2 


1 


- 


- 


Fitch burg, . 








34,263 


9 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


9 


2 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


6 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


16 


5 


5 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


6 


1 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


7 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


12 


1 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


5 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


5 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


3 


1 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


8 


4 


3 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Med ford, . 








20,921 


7 


2 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, . 








16,386 


5 


- 


3 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


4 


4 


3 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


2 





1 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


3 





- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


9 


1 


3 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


6 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


3 


- 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


4 





- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Peabody, 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


5 


2 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


6 


3 


6 


2 


1 


- 


~ 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


3 





- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


2 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, . 








12,722 


4 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


1 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Soutlibridge, 








11,848 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


3 


1 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


6 


- 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, 








10,520 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


1 


— 






— 









Recapiliilalio?i. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,379,468 



753 196 265 



123 77 12 



23 









Week ending Feb 


. 20, 


1909. 














HA 

s 

■ u 




> 

u 
3 

-z 




)>KATHS 


PBOM — 




= J2 


zc 




*• 


CITIES AND TOWNS. 


5-2 







_ — 


= ? 




■ 


> 




g-a 


£4 

a a 




"a s 
a- c « 

e « 2 

- ~ & 


-1 

a ■ 

§0 


JO 


B 

Q 

a. 


3 J 

JB I 




— 


X 


— 


£ 


". 


- 


5 


£ * 


Boston, 


624,491 


265 


69 


85 


36 


29 


3 




2 


Worcester, 








136,476 


39 


11 


15 


9 


4 




_ 




Fall River, 








106,486 


41 


23 


19 


10 


6 


_ 


_ 




Cambridge, 








102,112 


23 


5 


6 


2 


3 


1 


_ 


_ 


Lowell, 








96,380 


41 


14 


20 


13 


4 


1 


_ 


_ 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


29 


10 


10 


7 


2 






_ 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


21 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Springfield, 








84,237 


26 


6 


8 


5 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


27 


9 


18 


12 


6 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Somerville, 








76,049 


29 


8 


8 


6 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


21 


7 


6 


3 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


22 


9 


11 


5 


4 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Maiden, 








41,941 


15 


5 


7 


3 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


11 





2 


- 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Newton, 








39,642 


9 


2 


3 


2 


1 


_ 


_ _ 


Salem, 








39,019 


17 


5 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


17 


3 


4 


2 


2 


_ 


_ 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


8 


5 


1 


- 


- 


1 


_ _ 


Everett, 








33,597 


12 


3 


2 


- 


1 


_ 


_ _ 


Quincy, 








31,937 


9 


1 


3 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


17 


3 


8 


5 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


10 


2 


3 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ _ 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


9 





_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


5 


- 


4 


2 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


5 


2 


1 


_ 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


North Adams, 








22,150 


17 


5 


6 


4 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Northampton, 








21,075 


5 





2 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


10 


4 


6 


4 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Medford, . 








20,921 


2 


2 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Beverly, 








16,386 


1 


1 


1 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Leominster, 








16,030 


4 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


3 





- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Melrose, 








15,459 


5 


1 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


10 


- 


3 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Revere, 








14,820 


5 


3 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


"Westfield, . 








14,750 


7 


2 


4 


4 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


5 


1 


5 


1 


4 


, 


_ 


_ 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


7 


1 


1 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Attleborough , 








13,913 


2 





- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Adams, 








13,685 


4 


- 


2 


_ 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Clinton, 








13,105 


6 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


4 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Mil ford, . 








12,722 


1 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Watertown, 








12,676 


5 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


5 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


3 


2 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


4 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 






10,140 


3 


— 


1 


1 


— 


- 


— 


- 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,379,468 848 



234 



284 



150 88 



24 



Week ending Feb. 27, 1909. 





■r 


c 


> 




Deaths 


fROM 








si 


a 
















CITIES AND TOWNS. 


:« 


CO 




a 


■j 
> 

4> 












5 = • 


J» 






•3"" 






* O 






O-O so 
















s§ 


.= a 


■j-o 


® GO 


— 


£Z 


a 


"5 




H 


£^ 


s>* 


*CC* cy 


go 


S 


o. 


p. 


a 




CU 


« 


— 


~ 


■< 


04 


^ 


P 


s 


Boston, 


624,491 


225 


74 


74 


34 


13 


6 


1 


3 


Worcester, 








186,476 


40 


9 


13 


8 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


31 


10 


13 


5 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


35 


16 


12 


8 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


38 


11 


14 


9 


4 


- 


- 


- 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


30 


11 


11 


4 


4 


- 


- 


- 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


32 


5 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


24 


7 


4 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


35 


15 


11 


6 


2 


- 


1 


- 


Somerville, 








76,049 


36 


10 


11 


4 


3 


3 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


7 


4 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Holyoke, • 








53,590 


25 


13 


13 


8 


3 


- 


- 


1 


Maiden, 








41,941 


11 


5 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


9 


3 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


12 


2 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


10 


2 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


10 


2 


6 


4 


2 




- 


- 


Fitchburg, . 








34,263 


14 


5 


5 


4 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


4 


1 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


7 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


13 


8 


4 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


11 


2 


3 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


8 


1 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


5 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


2 


1 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


8 


2 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


6 





2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


4 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


6 


- 


3 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


5 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


4 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


1 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


1 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


5 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


7 


1 


5 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, 








14,522 


4 


1 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


9 


2 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


3 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


1 


Clinton, 








13,105 


3 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, 








12,722 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


3 





2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


1 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


4 


2 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 






10,140 


1 


~ 


1 


1 


— 


— 


" 


— 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,366,746 761 233 235 



125 45 13 



25 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CERTAIN INFECTIOUS 

DISEASES. 



Deaths from Infectious Diseases not specifically mentioned in- 
above Tables during the Weeks of February 6, 13, 20 and 27, 
1909. 











Week knding — 


DISEASE. 


Place. 


Feb. 6. 


Feb. 18. Feb. 20. 


Feb. 27. 


Cerebro-spinal meningitis, 


Adams, 

Holyoke, . 

Lowell, 

Lynn,. 

New Bedford, . 

No. Adams, 

Worcester, 




1 


1 

2 

1 


I 

i 


- 


Scarlet fever, .... 


Boston, 

Cambridge, 

Everett, 

Lynn, 

New Bedford, 

Somerville, 

Worcester, 




2 


5 

1 
1 


2 
1 




Whooping cough, 


Adams, 

Boston, 

Brockton, 

Cambridge 

Chicopee, 

Everett, 

Holyoke, 

Lowell, 

Marlboroug 

New Bedfo 

Somerville 

Taunton, 

Weymouth 

Worcester, 


rd, 




1 
3 

1 

1 

1 

1 


2 

1 

1 

1 


1 
2 

- 

- 

1 

1 

- 


- 




Boston, 
Brockton, . 
Fall River, 
Lowell, 
Maiden, 
No. Adams, 
Somerville, 
Springfield, 
Worcester, 




2 
1 


2 

i 
i 


1 

1 

1 
1 

1 


5 

1 

- 


Meningitis, other than cerebro- 
spinal. 


Maiden, 
Milford, . 

Waltham, . 
Watertown, 


- 


- 


1 

1 
1 


1 



26 



DISEASE. 



Tuberculosis other than pulmo- 
nary. 



lioston, 

Cambridge, 

Quincy, 



Week ending — 



Feb. 6. 



Feb. 13. Feb. 20. Feb. 27. 



Influenza, 



Adams, 
Boston , 
Cambridge, 
Medford, . 
No. Adams, 
Springfield, 
Westfield, , 



Smallpox New Bedford 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF CASES OP INFECTIOUS DISEASES. 



Cases of Infectious Diseases eeported during the Weeks of Feb- 
ruary 6, 13, 20 and 27, 1909. 

[Under the provisions of section 52 of chapter 75 of the Revised Laws.] 



Week ending — 



Diphtheria, 

Measles, 

Scarlet fever, 

Typhoid fever, 

Tuberculosis, pulmonary, . 
Cerebro-spinal meningitis, . 

Whooping cough 

Varicella, 

Erysipelas, 

Mumps, 

Meningitis other than cerebro-spinal, 
Ophthalmia neonatorum, 
Anterior poliomyelitis, 
Tuberculosis other than pulmonary, 

Smallpox, 

Tracoma, 

Tetanus, . . . • . 
Scabies, 



167 
401 
165 
21 
132 

106 
68 

5 
1 
1 



161 

436 

143 

17 

112 

1 

149 

107 

3 

4 

1 
1 

1 



152 
407 
182 

15 

141 

1 

68 

55 
1 

12 



113 

502 

174 

20 

130 

2 

38 

68 

2 

1 



27 



MONTHLY REPORT ON INSPECTION OF FOOD AND DRUGS. 



The following summary presents the results of the examination of food 
and drugs made by the State Board of Health during the month of 
February, 1909: — 



Articles examined. 


Number 
found 
to be of 


Number 
adulterated 
or varying 


Total. 


Articles examined. 


Number 
found 
to be of 


Number 

adulterated 
or vary i Dg 


Total. 




Good 
Quality. 


Legal 
Standard. 






Good 
Quality. 


Legal 

Standard. 




Baking powder, . 
Butter, . 


1 
9 


- 


1 
9 


Meat products : — 
Beef extract, 


1 




1 


Cheese, 


4 


- 


4 


Canned meats, . 


6 


_ 


6 


Cider, . 
Cocoa, . 


1 
3 


1 


2 
3 


Hamburg steak, 
Head cheese, . 


4 
1 


1 
- 


5 

1 


Confectionery, 


1 


- 


1 


Lambs' tongues, 


1 


- 


1 


Condensed milk, . 


3 


- 


3 


Sausages, . 


16 


4 


20» 


Cream, . 


9 


- 


9 


Tripe, 


3 


- 


3 


Drugs, . 


64 


15 


79 


Milk, . 


175 


32 


207 


Flavoring ex- 








Olive oil, 


32 


18 


60 


tracts: — 








Pickles, 


1 


- 


1 


Lemon, 

Peppermint, 

Vanilla, 


2 


1 
2 
1 


1 

2 
3 


Proprietary foods, 
Salad dressing, . 
Salad oil, 


2 
1 

2 


2 


4 
1 
2 


"" Wintergreen, . 

Honey, . 

Jams, jellies and 


5 
6 


1 
1 


1 
5 

7 


Shrimp, 
Spices, . 
Syrup, . 


1 

13 

1 


.1 


o 

"J 13 

1 


preserves. 
Lard, 


2 




2 


Table sauces, 
Vinegar, 


5 

56 


29 


5 
85, 


Malt extract, 
Maple sugar, 


1 
3 




1 

3 










- 


Total, . 


436 


109 


545J 


Maple syrup, 


1 


— 


1 











The samples of drugs found to be adulterated were : olive oil, spirit 
of camphor, spirit of peppermint and several proprietary medicines. 

The cities and towns in which samples were collected, were: Attle- 
borough, Ayer, Beverly, Boston, Brockton, Brookline, Cambridge, Chic- 
opee, Danvers, Dracut, Dunstable, Fall Eiver, Gloucester, Haverhill, 
Holyoke, Hyde Park, Lawrence, Lexington, Lowell, Melrose, Xorth 
Attleborough, North Andover, Pittsfield, Beading, Salem, Springfield, 
Taunton, Wakefield, Waltham, Watertown, West Springfield, Woburn 
and Worcester. 



28 



PROSECUTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW RELATING 
TO FOOD AND DRUGS. 



Twenty- three convictions were secured during the month of February, 
1909, for selling adulterated food, as follows: — 



No. 


Name of Defendant. 


Place. 


Character of Article sold. 


1 


Edward C. Hall 


Watertown, . 


Cider. 1 , 2 


2 


George Tomassetti, 








Watertown, 




Cider. 1 , 2 


3 


Daniel A. Neylon, 








Springfield, 




Cream. 3 


4 


Archibald F. Blair, 








Roxbury, 




Hamburg steak. 1 


5 


John F. Coleman, 








Boston, . 




Hamburg steak. 1 , 2 


6 


David R. Grewer, 








Roxbury, 




Hamburg steak. 1 


7 


Thos. F. Grinshaw, 








Roxbury, 




Hamburg steak. 1 


8 


George W. Gilbert, 








Roxbury, 




Hamburg steak. 1 


9 


Israel Mostowich, 








Roxbury, 




Hamburg steak. 1 


10 


Joseph Pellman, . 








Roxbury, 




Hamburg steak.' 


11 


Elbridge A. Pickard, 








Roxbury, 




Hamburg steak. 1 


12 


Geo. W. Scott, . 








Roxbury, 




Hamburg steak. 1 


13 


Bernard I. Siegel, 








Roxbury, 




Hamburg steak. 1 


14 


Frank Steeves, 








Roxbury, 




Hamburg steak. 1 


15 


Alfred Cbarron, . 








Easthampton 




Milk. 4 


16 


John P. Dowling, 








Pittsfield, 




Milk. n 


17 


John P. Dowling, 








Pittsfield, 




Milk (total solids, 12). 


18 


George Dufton, . 








Andover, 




Milk (total solids, 11 20). 


19 


Wm. L. Peabody, 








Dracut. . 




Milk (total solids, 11.70). 


20 


Varnum B. Richardson, 






Metbuen, 




Milk (total solids, 10.94) . 


21 


Jabez R. Suinmersgill, 






Lawrence, 




Milk (total solids, 7.47) .« 


22 


James F. Torrey, 






Pittsfield, 




Milk. 5 


23 


James F. Torrey, 






Pittsfield, 




Milk (total solids, 11.80). 



i Contained a preservative. 

2 Appealed. 

;! Contained sugar and calcium sucrate. 



* Skimmed; can not marked. 
5 Watered. 



Fines imposed, $534. 



29 



P 
< 

P 

p 
p 

P 

p 
o 
p 

6 

Eh 
P 

m 
P 
O 
O 
P 

P 

p 
p 
p 
p 
p 
<l 
p 

I* 
p 
« 
p 
p 
o 
« 
p 

H 

o 

R 
P 
En 
<J 
P 
P 
Eh 
P 
P 
P 
< 

P 
O 

Eh 
02 



fc 80 



o> to a> 






<B <B <C 

P<& a, | 



p i-H CI i-H 



f/3 M «} O O 

;_;—;_ <d <d 

'OS 



<T> XT. .,-. .r-c « a S 8 



+j -£ P p p 



o o 
HHHO 



O O 



o o, 



■S « - 



T3 p 
P '-i 

-I 



oT p O 



01 Dm' 
fa 



e8 03 

O S-l 

o a 
P o 
P«2 



59 



fa oo 



C&OH 

2SR_ 

c3 O -~ 

2 « ® 3 
oHo£ 



~ a> j5 © 



2.2 - 



Ah" 


2 ° 

o S 


IS 

Pi 


ai 


o^ 


O 


D 


•^ .« 


~ 




© — 





| i— i — <o 2 _» 



o o 



pq 



a ~ *-> ® 



<4 § 



a 



3 Ph 






o <^ 



-° p 

- ft 

Or3 
O 0) 



s r 



— a « p »" ^jc 



i OO 



o oo ° <*-«<< T3 
® u S •- '• & '• ^ 

OSBcco o P <4 



•- c S 



CO <M •* tD ■* -<*l 
>-t CO CC CO iH (N 

05 HHHfflO) 



PhPhOhPH) 



«o O O i-l ■ 
!M C O © i 

a o^ o^ ov i 



111 (Xi 



:30 



INSPECTION OF DAIRIES. 



During the month of February, 1909, 144 dairies were examined in 
the following places : — 



Number 
examined. 



Number found 

to present 

no Objectionable 

Features. 



Number to 

which Letters 

were sent. 



Dracut, 

Second inspection, 
Everett, 

Fourth inspection, 
Harvard, 

Second inspection, 
Littleton, 

Second inspection, 

Third inspection, 
Lowell, 

Second inspection, 
Princeton, 

Second inspection, 
Tewkshury, . 

Second inspection, 
Tyngsborough, 

Second inspection, 
Westford, 

Third inspection, 



12 
40 

1 

5 

24 

1 

3 

1 

14 

1 
5 
27 
6 
3 



2 
12 



5 

15 
2 
o 



16.67 
30.00 



20.00 
45.83 



66.67 

100.00 

35.71 



100. 00 
55.56 
33.33 

100.00 



10 
28 

1 

4 

13 

1 
1 

9 

1 

12 
4 



83.33 
70.00 

100.00 
80.00 
54.17 

100.00 
33.33 

64.29 

100.00 

44.44 
66.67 

100.00 



Total number of dairies examined, 144 

Number found to be free from objectionable conditions, 59 

Number to which letters were sent, 85 

Total number of conditions to which attention was called 297 

Percentage of dairies which passed inspection, 40.97 



The names of the owners of dairies found to be worthy of commenda- 
tion follow : — 

Dracut. 



Beal, Benjamin ', 2 
Bryant Bros. 1 , 2 
Coburn, R. D. 1 , 2 
Crosby, F. L. 1 
Fox, Estate of Fred A. 1 



Long, Henry 
Maille, J. A.' 
Peabody, I. W. 1 , 2 
Peavey, N. L. 1 
Rhomberg, Reunold 



Richardson, Almon ',' 
Shaw, Mark 

Stevens, Estate of Edward A. ', 
Whittier Bros. 1 



Bryant, A. W. 1 
Cobb, George E. 
Cushman, Mrs. A. 1 , 2 
Hapgood, J. Gardner ',' 



Harvard. 

Harvard Town Farm 
Hussey, C. W. 1 
Parker, A. D. 1 

Parker, N. F.', 2 



Rockwell, Albert ' 
Scales, Mrs. R. P.', 
Stone, Howard • 
Wing, H. A. 1 , 2 



Littleton. 
Sanderson, George W. 3 Whitcomb, J. H. D. 



i Second Inspection, - Reported favorably on first inspection as well. 3 Third inspection. 



31 



Bean, A. J.', 2 
Edwards, James 



Andersen, Axel ' 
Battles, Charles M. 1 , 2 
Brutt, B. W. 1 
Carter, F. J.', 2 
Chandler, Miss Hannah 
French, Charles 
French, E. H. 1 



Blodgett, H. N. 
Cady, Harry 



Lowell. 

Horr, Albert M. 1 
Hull, Kate F.', 2 

Tewhsbury. 

French, John F. 1 
Haynes, Frank ' 
Hood, C. I.", 2 
King, B. 

McCausland, Robert 
Osterman, Aaron ' 
Parsons, C. W. 1 

Tyngsborougli. 



i, D.L.* 
Upton, H. H.' 



Peirce, If. If. 

Roark, James S. 1 , 1 



Pillsbury, H. W. 1 , 2 
Rogers, David ' 
Sperry, Eben ' 
Stevens, B. 

Tewksbury Town Farm ' 
Trull, George 



Williams, David J. 1 



THE INFANTILE MORTALITY OF BOSTON DURING THE 
PERIOD JUNE 1 TO NOV. 30, 1907. J 



By Donald Geegg, M.D. 



On June 1, 1907, was undertaken an investigation which was to 
cover as completely as possible the entire infantile mortality of the 
city of Boston for the six months next ensuing, with especial reference 
to preventable causes and the influence of the mode of feeding and the 
character of the food. Through the courtesy of the board of health, 
access was granted to the daily returns of deaths, from which the neces- 
sary data as to age and place of death and other facts were derived. 
As soon as possible after the cases to be investigated were reported (those 
of infants under one year of age), the recorded residences or institu- 
tions were visited and the information desired obtained at first hand, 
from the mother or from the attending physician or other person hav- 
ing it. 

During the whole period, in but four cases in which the mode of 
feeding could have been a factor was it impossible to obtain the re- 
quired data, and then only because of removal to places unknown to 
neighbors. In a few cases of abandonment of infants at birth no fact? 
were obtainable; but these cases may be disregarded so far as this in- 



1 Second inspection. 

2 Reported favorably on first inspection as well. 



3 Reprinted in part from the Thiity-ninth 
Annual Report of the State Board of 
Health of Massachusetts. 



32 



2 tion is concerned, inasmuch as these victims were fed neither 
naturally nor artificially. 

In the results tabulated below, the figures do not correspond exactly 
with the official records, since in a number of instances incorrect ages 
were reported. 

The number of cases reported and investigated was 1,315, divided 
bv months as follows : — 



June, ....... 


147 


July. ....... 


173 


August. ....... 


355 


September, ...... 


277 


October, ....... 


220 


November, ...... 


143 



Conclusions. 

The 1.315 infants that died in Boston during the sis months may 
be grouped under five headings : — 

1. Those who were predestined to die because of some congenital 
defect (parental weakness or parental sickness, prematurity, malforma- 

. or obstetrical difficulty). 

2. Illegitimate, and hence not welcome. • 

3. Abandoned, although legitimate, the parents being habitual drunk- 
ards or in extremely poor circumstances. 

4. Those who acquired the common communicable diseases, as measles, 
whooping cough, etc. 

5. Those improperly fed, either with foods naturally unsuited to in- 
fants'* stomachs, or with polluted (dirty) milk, containing the common 
iind usual exciting causes of that group of digestive diseases known 
generally as cholera infantum, but more properly as epidemic diarrhoea. 

A reduction in the mortality due to improper feeding will take place 
only when physicians, nurses, mothers and the general public understand 
the importance of cleanliness of the milk supply from the moment of 
- ->roduction to that of its consumption. That 740 babies died in 
-:on during the six months, of preventable gastro-intestinal diseases 
due to improper feeding, is proof of the need of a more wholesome milk 
supply. 



33 



INFANT MORTALITY AND ITS INTIMATE RELATION WITH 
THE MILK SUPPLY. 



Of the 3,058 deaths reported from all causes, 598 were in children 
under five years of age, and of these, 428 were under one year of i s 
649 of the total deaths were in persons over seventy years of a _ 

The accompanying table shows for two periods of ten years each the 
deaths in children under one year of age by months and the deaths in per- 
sons over seventy years of age by years. We did not inquire why there is 
an increase in the number of deaths over seventy years of age, because 
most of us desire a long life. We did inquire why children under one 
year of age died so much more frequently in July and August during 
the first period, and now it is pertinent to inquire why children under 
one year of age die in larger numbers in July and August than they 
do in May or June. 

If the deaths under one year of age are scanned for the past few years, 
it will be noted that in 1904 there began to be a sharp rise in the deaths 
under one year of age, this rise was followed by another sharper rise in 
1905, and that for the past three years the deaths in children under one 
year of age have not found their former level. During these years the 
price of all commodities, including food stuffs, has materially advanced, 
and during these years the agitation for an icing clause in the milk 
ordinance was being carried on. In 1907, after defeats and postpone- 
ments of that clause in the milk ordinance, the rise in the bacterial con- 
tent of milk was greater than that of any period which we have known 
since systematic milk examinations were undertaken in this city. The 
deaths in little children thus have a distinct relation to the cost of 
living and to the city's willingness to furnish them clean, cold milk. 

Thousands of cattle in this vicinity provide milk for the people in 
Eochester of whom 20,000 are children under five years of age. Among 
the men who produce and handle this milk there is neither adequate 
education nor training. The milkman deals in the most perishable of 
foods. The milkman acquires a license without examination, by a 
simple declaration and the payment of a dollar or two : but the man 
who cuts your corns, shaves you, attends you in sickness or buries your 
dead must pass an examination before acquiring a license. The milkman 
knows nothing of the underlying principles of even the simp" e - 
of cleanliness, yet he produces and purveys the most perishable of fc 

1 Extract from the annual report of George W. Goler. M.D., Health OScer of the city of 
Eochester. N.Y. 1907. 



34: 

When will we in America begin to realize the necessity for adequate 
attention to the milk supply ? Abroad they have begun to understand the 
relation of milk to the baby. They have found, as in Berlin, for instance, 
that in 1895 forty-five per cent, of their infants were breast fed, while 
in 1905 less than thirty-three per cent, of their infants were breast fed. 
In America less than twenty-five per cent, of mothers in affluent cir- 
cumstances are able to nurse their children. They are thus compelled 
to fall back upon the cow, — to make their babies parasites upon a four- 
footed board-faced animal, who may furnish excellent food for a calf, 
but very indifferent food for a human being. Even at best, cow's milk 
is poor food for a human baby. It has a fat, casein and sugar content 
different from human milk. The only way to make cow's milk fit for a 
human baby is to feed it into the nursing mother. 

For these and other reasons all people should join in protecting the 
milk supply. Physicians should educate the public, establish infants' 
milk depots throughout the city, especially in connection with hospitals 
and medical schools, where physicians, students and nurses may learn 
the value of good, clean milk in infant and invalid feeding. Now, as 
in the past, the milk supply of hospitals is notoriously bad. Why do 
they pay less attention to their milk than to their drugs? The im- 
portance of a milk diet for the sick is fairly well understood, but of 
how much greater importance is milk as a diet for infants. Of 144 
infants who died in Eochester of gastro-intestinal diseases during July, 
August and September, but 22 were breast fed. In all cities bottle-fed 
infants greatly exceed those who are breast fed. The baby needs clean 
milk. How many cities have clean milk, — milk that can be trusted 
as food for infants? How many cities compel dealers to ice their 
milk, so that it may not swarm with bacteria and the soluble filth which 
most of it contains? The evident filth you know is retained on the 
strainer cloth, while the soluble filth goes through into the milk. But 
eleven cities in this whole country have ordinances which compel the 
dealer to keep milk cold; these are New York, Boston, Brockton, Los 
Angeles, Detroit, Cleveland, Cincinnati, St. Louis, St. Paul, Minneapolis 
and Eochester. Nearly every city in the country is feeding milk to its 
babies from tuberculous cattle, and then asking the State to provide 
sanatoria for the children who have become tubercular from drinking 
the milk of tuberculous cows. The cities that have ordinances, and en- 
force them, against milk from tuberculous cows, could be counted on 
the fingers of a badly maimed hand. What are we going to do for the 
problems which these questions suggest? 

Will we educate the producer by establishing for him a model farm, 
where he may learn how to produce milk in a modern and safe way? 



35 

Will we educate the retailer by providing for him a model milk ro-.m 
in connection with our health departments, where he may have 
him a demonstration plant that he may readily see and understand ? Will 
we put in our parks a model dairy and milk room, and let our people 
take their babies to a nursery pavilion in its neighborhood, where I 
may see what it means to make clean milk? When we have done these 
things, let us pass adequate laws and ordinances, and then enforce them. 
Have milk delivered cold from tuberculin-tested cattle. Be as proud 
of the milk department of your city as you would of its fire department. 
Don't cook milk and manure, and call it pasteurized milk. Uncooked 
milk has a restraining power for those organisms found in milk, but 
heat this milk, pasteurize it, and the resisting power is lost. Pasteurize 
milk, and more care is required, because the germicidal or resisting 
power that existed in it as raw milk has been lost. The danger of feed- 
ing children infected pasteurized milk is a grave danger, and may be 
followed by a train of symptoms serious and even fatal. 

We grow grains, grasses, fruits and flowers, and we cultivate and weed 
them. What are we doing for our children ? Are we cultivating them ? 
Are we doing for them what the agriculturist does for grasses, fruits and 
flowers ? Are we even in their formative state giving them decent food ? 



REPORT OP THE STATE BOARD OP HEALTH iTJPON THE 
SANITARY CONDITION OP THE MERRIMACK RIVER. 



[Under the Provisions of Chapter 11-1 of the Resolves of 190S.] 



To the General Court of Massachusetts. 

In accordance with chapter 114 of the Resolves of 1908, the State 
Board of Health makes the following report upon the sanitary condition 
of the bed, banks and waters of the Merrimack River and of the streams 
tributary thereto. ISTo appropriation was made for the proposed investi- 
gation, and it has been made with the help of the general funds of the 
Board and those for the examination of sewer outlets, with the results 
contained in the appended report of the chief engineer of the Board. 
The facts therein are made a part of this report. 

The river as it enters the State from New Hampshire has on its 
main line and branches received sewage from 180,000 people, together 
with large manufacturing wastes. The resulting pollution, as indicated 
by the amount of albuminoid ammonia, has in the past twenty years 
increased about 40 per cent.; but, as in the early years of this period 



36 

the flow of water in the river was greater than usual and in the past 
few years has been less, ending with the driest year of the period, the 
actual increase in pollution is not as much as 40 per cent. The pollu- 
tion of the river above Lawrence has in the same time increased at 
about the same rate. Above Haverhill observations are limited to the 
past ten years, in which the increase in percentage per year has been 
about the same as that above Lawrence. 

For the past few years the pollution above Lawrence has been 35 per 
cent, more than that above Lowell, and the pollution above Haverhill 
has been 31 per cent, more than that above Lawrence, while the increase 
in passing Haverhill is about 7 per cent. 

Farther down the river the water is less polluted, so that, entering 
the State with a certain amount of pollution, this pollution is, where 
greatest, increased about 90 per cent, by passing the cities of Lowell, 
Lawrence and Haverhill. * 

At present this stream of water is not in a condition to be injurious 
to the public health, and by proper regulation it may be kept many 
years, perhaps generations, free from danger. 

There are, however, many localities in each of these cities, near the 
outlet of sewers, where the stream is locally polluted, the sewage not 
being disseminated through the stream; and where the bed and banks 
at night and on Sundays, when the mills are not running, and at low 
tide near the lower city, are exposed, coated with the refuse of sewage 
and of some manufacturing wastes. At these places the conditions are 
injurious to the health of those living or working near. 

These conditions may be obviated in general by extending the sewer 
by an iron pipe, smaller than the sewer, but large enough to convey the 
ordinary sewage, to beyond the edge of the stream at the lowest stage 
and discharging under water, so that a clean stream of water may con- 
tinually flow between the shore and the outlet. In this way the sewage 
becomes diluted by the water into which it is discharged and the shore 
is kept clean. 

Of the manufacturing wastes the most obvious and the one that 
causes the most complaint upon this river is that resulting from the 
scouring of wool. This process of washing and discharging the effluent 
containing large quantities of grease into the river results in a grease- 
covered shore and bed for a long distance down stream. The grease 
associates with and holds other objectionable matter, and while we 
cannot Bay that it has up to this time been injurious or dangerous to 
the public health, it has become very disagreeable. The boatmen at Ha- 
verhill complain of the black grease adhering to their boats. It is at 



37 

present a very disagreeable addition to the river, and may become in- 
jurious to the public health. 

In other countries, and to some extent in this, the grease, which i.- 
the objectionable element of the effluent, is removed and made into 
valuable articles of commerce. 

It would probably be no great hardship if the scourers of wool were 
required to keep the grease out of the river. If this were done the 
appearance of the river would be very much improved, and the ground 
for much of the complaint in regard to its present condition removed. 

The pollution entering this river from beyond the State renders it 
impracticable to include it with those rivers used for water supplies; 
but the local nuisances and the increasing pollution require that more 
complete regulation be applied to this river, and to this end the Board 
recommends that section 123 of chapter 75 of the Revised Laws be 
modified to read as follows : — 

Section 123. The provisions of the five preceding sections, and of so much 
of sections one hundred and twelve to one hundred and seventeen inclusi\ ■ 
refer to domestic water supplies, shall not apply to the Merrimack or Con- 
necticut rivers, nor to so much of the Concord river as lies within the limits of 
the city of Lowell, nor to springs, streams, ponds or water courses over which 
the metropolitan water board has control. 



MONTHLY til BULLETIN 



OF THE 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH 



OF 



MASSACHUSETTS. 



An official publication of the State Board of Health of Massachusetts, issued monthly 
from the office of the Board, 141 State House, Boston, Mass. 



New Series. MARCH, 1909. Vol. 4. No. 3. 



Entered at the Post-office at Boston, Feb. 15, 1906, as Second-class Matter. Act 

of July 16, 1894. 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. 



HENRY P. WALCOTT, M.D., CAMBRIDGE, Chairman. 



JULIAN A. MEAD, M.D., Watertown. 
HIRAM F. MILLS, C.E., Lawrence. 
GERARD C. TOBEY, ESQ., Wareham. 



JAMES W. HULL, PlTTSFIELD. 
CHARLES H. PORTER, QDINCY. 
ROBERT W. LOVETT, M.D., BOSTON. 



MARK VV. RICHARDSON, M.D., Secretary. 



BOSTON: 

WRIGHT & POTTER PRINTING CO., STATE PRINTERS, 

18 Post Office Square. 

1909. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



Pack 

Weekly returns of deaths from cities and towns of more than 10,000 population, . 41 

Weekly returns of deaths from certain infectious diseases, ..... 45 

Weekly returns of cases of infectious diseases, ........ 46 

Monthly report on inspection of food and drugs, 47 

Prosecutions for violations of the law relating to food and drugs, .... 48 

List of adulterated foods, etc., for February, 1909, 49 

Inspection of dairies, 50 

Proprietary preparations advertised as unsalable in January, 1909 51 

Proprietary preparations advertised as unsalable in March, 1909 51 

Proprietary preparations advertised as unsalable during 1908, 52 

Proprietary preparations ; prohibition of sale removed, 53 

Enforcement of the statutes relative to the manufacture of clothing in tenements 

and dwellings, 54 

The composition of the milk on sale in Massachusetts, 54 



WEEKLY RETURNS OP DEATHS FROM CITIES AND TOWNS 
OF MORE THAN 10,000 POPULATION. 









Week ending 


March f,, 


1909. 














Wei 
o 

03 

=i 

o — 

S"3 


C3 

i • 


a* 

> 

-z 

•a 




llKATHS 


KROM — 


CITIES AND TOWNS. 


— ~n 


= . 

- 00 

" 21 




m 

C 

V 


- 








Sjs 


CO E 


— Z x 














|a 


ft 




o3 - 






c. 


5 


e 






— 


— 


a. 


< 




— 


P 


S 


Boston, 


624,491 


232 


55 


98 


:;'.» :;2 


4 


_ 


1 


Worcester, 








136,476 


33 


2 


14 


8 I 4 


1 


_ 


_ 


Fall River, 








106,486 


51 


14 


22 


12 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


33 


7 


13 


8 


4 


- 


_ 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


40 


13 


16 


13 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


24 


12 


10 


7 


1 


_ 


_ 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


23 


4 


2 


- 


1 


- 


_ 


Springfield, 








84,237 


22 


5 


4 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


27 


10 


9 


5 


:; 


- 


1 


_ 


Sornerville, 








76,049 


27 


7 


7 


4 


1 


- 


_ 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


15 


6 


4 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


2 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


22 


8 


13 


7 


3 


1 


1 


Maiden, 








41,941 


5 


- 


2 


2 


- 


- _ 


_ 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


8 


2 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Newton, 








39,642 


13 


2 


6 


3 


- 


1 1 - 


Salem, 








39,019 


13 


2 


2 


2 


- 


- - 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


12 


2 


3 


1 


1 


1 - 1 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


9 


4 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


8 


2 


- 


_ 


- 


_ _ 


_ 


Quincy, 








31,937 


8 


1 


1 


- 


1 




- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


17 


2 


8 


4 


1 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


16 


4 


5 


3 


1 


- 


1 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


7 


2 


5 


4 


1 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26.674 


4 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


3 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


5 


- 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


5 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


11 


3 


4 


3 


1 


— ~ 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


7 


3 


2 


1 


1 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


4 


- 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


- _ 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


5 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


3 





1 


1 


- 


- | - 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


4 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- _ 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


Woburn, 








14,522 


5 


1 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


7 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


A ttleborough , 








13,913 


3 


1 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


6 


1 


3 


1 


1 


1 


- 


Gardner, . 








13.066 


3 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, 








12,722 


4 


1 


3 


2 


- 


- - 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


4 


2 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


— 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


5 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


— ~~ 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


5 


- 


3 


2 


1 




- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Webster. . 








11.109 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


1 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


3 


- 


1 


- 


- 


_ _ | _ 



Recapitulation 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,363,438 



773 



187 



278 



143 



64 14 



2 



1 The populations were estimated upon the rate of growth from 1900 to 1905. Those of Taunton, 
Gloucester, North Adams and Clinton were allowed to stand as in 1905, having shown no increase 
during the live-year period. The gain in the population of Lowell is due to the annexation of a 
part of the townof Tewksbury. The population of Lawrence by the census of 1905 was 70.050. but, 
owing to the building of the ne'w Wood and Arlington mills, an increase of about 8,000 is estimated 
by the Lawrence board of health, or 7S,000. 



42 



Week ending March 13, 1909. 





■£ 


£ 


» 




Dkaths 


FBOM 








^8 


DO 


■z 
















c A 


M 






u 




CITIKS AND TOWNS. 




•a 


C 


i = . 


C . 

i-J | 






9 

> 

•qEz. 






« a> 






C. o <n 




•7 


^ 




V 




II 


o 03 




lis 


§5 




c 


p. 






Bu 


ti. 


a 


c 


< 


^ 


E 


P 


2 


Boston, 


624,491 


211 


67 


112 


44 


28 


7 




5 


Worcester, 








136,476 


52 


16 


16 


10 


4 


- 


- 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


40 


22 


18 


9 


~ 


- 


- 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


23 


7 


13 


6 


4 


1 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


29 


10 


11 


9 


2 


- 


- 


- 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


37 


8 


15 


7 


7 


- 


- 


- 


Lynn,. 








84,623 


36 


8 


6 


- 


4 


- 




- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


30 


8 


10 


5 


~ 


1 




- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


27 


8 


12 


8 


2 


1 




- 


Somerville, 








76,049 


18 


3 


6 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


11 


4 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


1 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


21 


8 


13 


9 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


10 


2 


4 


- 


- 


1 


1 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


15 


3 


2 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


6 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,013 


13 


2 


5 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


14 


7 


5 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, . 








34,263 


13 


4 


4 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


8 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


8 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


10 


1 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


13 





7 


4 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


10 


2 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


6 


2 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


7 


3 


3 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


15 


6 


7 


4 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


7 


4 


2 


2 




- 


- 


- 


Med ford, . 








20,921 


10 


1 


4 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


4 


2 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


5 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


4 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


1 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


10 


- 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


5 


2 


3 


3 




- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


5 


3 


4 


3 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


7 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


5 





- 


- 


~~ 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


8 


1 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


3 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


9 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, . 








12,722 


3 


1 


3 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


3 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


1 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


3 


1 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


6 


1 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


2 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


~ 



Total of reporting towns, 



Reca2ritulation. 



2,379,468 863 232 313 



152 80 12 



i:; 



Week ending March 20, 1909. 













c 


> 

E 

u 




Dkaths 


FROM — 




£ « 


bj 






,• 




CITIES AND TOWNS. 




a 

•a 

?■% 


"3 

a 

— » 
gf-i 


a & s 


2 <• 

'I 

gS 


.c 


9 

£ 

— 


> 
■ 

-. 
£: 
=- 


• 

i 




E 


X 


c 


n. 


< 


s. 


C 


E- 


a 


Boston , 


624,491 


243 


67 


93 


48 


20 


4 




2 


Worcester, 








136,476 


43 


8 


11 


6 


3 


1 


_ 




Fall River, 








106,486 


35 


16 


20 


12 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


33 


10 


13 


5 


7 


1 


_ 


_ 


Lowell, 








96,380 


38 


15 


12 


9 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


29 


11 


11 


7 


4 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Lynn,. 








84,623 


25 





2 


_ 


_ 


1 


_ 


Springfield, 








84,237 


37 


6 


6 


3 


- 




2 - 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


44 


21 


17 


10 


5 


2 




Somerville, 








76,049 


25 


5 


11 


6 


2 


2 


_ _ 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


8 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Hoi yoke, . 








53,590 


18 


8 


3 


1 


2 


_ 


_ 


Maiden, 








41,941 


12 


2 


2 




1 


_ 


_ 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


13 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ _ 


Newton, 








39,642 


15 


3 


5 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ _ 


Salem, 








39,019 


17 


2 


6 


6 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


13 


4 


8 


4 


3 


1 


_ _ 


Fitchhurg, 








34,263 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 




_ 


_ 


Everett, 








33,597 


6 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Quincy, 








31,937 


9 


1 


2 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


14 


1 


5 


2 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


7 


_ 


3 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


6 


2 


3 


3 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Brook line, . 








26,674 


11 


_ 


4 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


8 


2 


1 


_ 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


North Adams, 








22,150 


13 


6 


2 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Northampton, 








21,075 


6 


1 


1 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


6 


1 


2 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


Medford, . 








20,921 


9 


_ 


2 


_ 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Beverly, . 








16,386 


4 


- 


2 


1 


- 


_ 


1 


_ 


Leominster, 








16,030 


3 


1 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


5 


2 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Melrose, 








15,459 


5 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


4 


- 


3 


1 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


Revere, 








14,820 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


5 


_ 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


7 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


. 


_ 


_ 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, . 








14,456 


6 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, . 








13,913 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


3 


2 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


- 


_ 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


4 


2 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Milford, . 








12,722 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


• - 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


1 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


1 





1 


- 


1 j 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, . 








11,749 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- | 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- | 


— 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Greenfield, 






10,140 


3 


_ 


1 


1 


- 


_ 


— 


_ 


Recapitulation. 


Total of reporting towns, 


2,232,483 


811 


209 


257 


136 


65 1 


14 


3 


2 



44 



Week ending Makch 27, 1909. 











So 

§<2 


OS 

Q 


> 
u 

X) 




Deaths 


FROM — 


CITIES AND TOWNS. 


= .2 


to 
B 

3 • 




£ 


S 

> 






53 *B 






« S . 


»^a 






2 fe 






« OJ 


■Sc 


*> ■— 


3-0 «! 






a 








s a 


o a 


~ « 


"« ** » 


2. x 


£2 


2 


a 


~r. 




g-a 


S-w 


£> 


~ £J « 

■£"- oj 


ga 


2 


E. 


0. 


9 






X 


Q 


£ 


■4 


— 


a 


H 


s 


Boston, 


i 

624,491 


248 


75 


112 


53 


25 


11 




5 


Worcester, 








186,476 


35 


7 


16 


11 


5 


- 


- 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


43 


15 


23 


11 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


29 


9 


14 


4 


7 


- 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


41 


8 


12 


7 


2 


1 


- 


- 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


23 


11 


10 


9 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


20 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


18 


2 


9 


5 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


25 


10 


10 


5 


1 


1 


- 


2 


Somerville, 








76,049 


20 


2 


4 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


19 


6 


7 


2 


3 


- 


- 


2 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


22 


9 


9 


6 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


7 


2 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


9 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


10 


4 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


9 


3 


4 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


11 


1 


6 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, . 








34,263 


9 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


7 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


9 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


16 


3 


8 


5 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


13 


2 


4 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


9 


2 


4 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


8 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


7 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


8 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


5 


- 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


3 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


1 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


4 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


7 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- - 


Woburn, 








14,522 


3 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


8 


2 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


8 


3 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


4 





2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


5 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Mil ford, 








12.722 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


"Watertown, 








12,676 


1 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


5 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


6 





3 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- | - 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- - 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


— — 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


2 


- 


_ 


- 


~ 


~ 


~ 


— 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,354,034 758 196 277 I 141 66 14 



45 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CERTAIN INFECTIOUS 

DISEASES. 



Deaths from Infectious Diseases not specifically mentioned ix 
above Tables during the Weeks of March 6, 13, 20 and 27, 
1909. 









Week ending — 


DISEASE. 


Place. 














Mar. 6. 


liar. 13 


Mar. 20. 


Mar. 27. 


Cerebro-spinal meningitis, 


Boston, 


1 


1 


_ 






Lynn,. 




- 


1 


- 


- 




Milford, . 




- 


1 


- 


- 




Newton, 




1 


- 


1 


_ 




Revere, 




1 


- 


- 


- 




Watertown, 




1 


- 


- 


- 




Worcester, 




- 


1 


- 




Scarlet fever, .... 


Boston, 


6 


3 


1 


2 




Brookline, . 




- 


- 


1 


- 




Cambridge, 




- 


1 


- 


- 




Everett, 




- 


- 


- 


1 




Fall River, 




- 


- 


- 


1 




Lynn, 




1 


1 




- 




Maiden, 




- 


1 


- 


- 




New Bedford, 




1 


- 


- 


- 




Newton, 




- 


- 


1 


- 




Somerville, 




- 


- 


1 


1 




Waltham, . 




- 


- 


- 


1 




Worcester, 




1 


- 


1 


- 


Whooping cough, 


Adams, 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 




Boston, 




7 


3 


2 


2 




Brockton, . 




1 


- 


- 


- 




Cambridge, 




- 


- 


- 


1 




Clinton, 




- 


- 


- 


1 




Holyoke, . 




- 


1 




- 




Leominster, 




- 


1 


- 


- 




Maiden, 




- 


- 


1 


- 




New Bedford, 




1 


- 


- 


- 




Somerville, 




- 


1 


- 


- 




Southbridge, 




- 


- 


- 


1 




Watertown, 




1 


_ 


" 






Boston, 


_ 


4 


i 


2 




Cambridge, 




1 


- 


- 


1 




Lowell, 




- 


- 


- 


1 




New Bedford, 




- 


1 




- 




Springfield, 




- 


1 




1 




Taunton, . 




- 


- 




1 




Worcester, 




— 


1 




" 



46 





l'lace. 




Wekk ending — 




DISEASE. 


Mar. 6. 


Mar. 13. 


Mar 20. 


Mar. 27. 


Tuberculosis other than pulmo- 
nary. 


Boston, 
Brookline, . 
Cambridge, 
Fall River, 
Quiucy, 
Springfield, 
Taunton, . 


1 


6 

1 

2 

1 


1 

1 
1 


1 


Meningitis, other than cerebro- 
spinal. 


Maiden, 

North Adams, . 




1 


1 


- 


Anthrax, 


Lynn 




- 


1 


- 



Influenza, 



Boston, 

Fitchburg, 

Gardner, . 

Greenfield, 

Leominster, 

Springfield, 

Weymouth, 







1 


3 


3 




il 


1 


- 






- 


1 


- 






1 


- 


- 






- 


1 


- 






- 


1 


- 













WEEKLY RETURNS OF CASES OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES. 



Cases of Infectious Diseases reported during the "Weeks of 
March 6, 13, 20 and 27, 1909. 

[Under the provisions of section 52 of chapter 75 of the Revised Laws.] 



Week ending — 



Diphtheria, 

Measles, 

Scarlet fever, .... 

Typhoid fever, .... 
Tuberculosis, pulmonary, . 
Cerebro-spinal meningitis, . 

Whooping cough 

Varicella 

Erysipelas 

Mumps, 

Meningitis other than cerebro-spinal 
Ophthalmia neonatorum, 
Anterior poliomyelitis, 
Tuberculosis other than pulmonary. 

Smallpox, 

Anthrax, 

Leprosy, 



124 
546 
190 

17 

101 

4 

56 

42 
1 

15 



139 

447 

167 

21 

175 

6 

56 

79 



181 

450 

200 

23 

129 

3 

63 

51 

5 

1 
7 

1 



166 

474 

156 

16 

151 

o 

44 

43 



17 



MONTHLY REPORT ON INSPECTION OF FOOD AND DRUGS. 



The following summary presents the results of the examination of 
and drugs made by the State Board of Health during the month of 
March, 1909 : — 



Articles examined. 



Baking powder, 
Butter, . 
Canned fruit, 
Canned vegeta 

bles, 
Cheese, . 
Cider, . 
Coffee extracts, 
Confectionery, 
Condensed milk, 
Cream, . 
Drugs, . 
Flavoring ex 
tracts : — 

Lemon, 

Orange, 

Vanilla, 
Grape juice, . 
Jams and jellies, 



Number 
found 

to be of 
Good 

Quality. 



Number 

adulterated 

or varying 

from the 

Legal 
Standard. 



3 
3 
2 

5 
12 
19 



Total. 



1 


3 


5 


5 ! 


- 


1 


_ 


1 


1 


1 


3 


6 


- 


3 


- 


2 


- 


5 


1 


13 


6 


25 


1 


2 


- 


1 


- 


3 


- 


1 


_ 


3 



Articles examined. 



Number 
found 

to be of 
Good 

Quality. 



Number 

adulterated 

or varying 

from "the 

Legal 
Standard. 



Malt extracts, 
Maple sugar, 
Maple syrup, 
Meat products : — 

Hamburg steak, 

Sausages, . 

Pressed meat, 

Beef extract, 
Milk, . 
Olive oil, 
Pickles. 

Proprietary foods 
Salad dressing, 
Spices, . 
Syrup, . 
Table sauces, 
Vinegar, 

Total, . 



13 

1 

4 

11 

1 

1 

296 

61 

3 

3 

1 

3 

1 

4 

14 



466 



38 
36 



13 



119 



Total 



18 
1 

5 

15 

1 

1 

334 

87 
3 

16 
1 
3 
1 
4 

18 



585 



The samples of drugs found to be adulterated were : spirit of pep- 
permint, tincture of iodine and proprietary medicines. 

The cities and towns in which samples were collected were: Arling- 
ton, Boston, Beverly, Braintree. Brookline, Cambridge, Chelmsford. 
Danvers, Fitchburg, Gloucester, Haverhill. Holyoke, Ipswich. Lawrence, 
Lexington, Lowell, Lynn, Maiden. Medford, Melrose, Middleborough. 
Milford, Xatick, iSTewburyport, Xorth Andover, Palmer, Peabody. Bock- 
land, Salem, South Framingham, Taunton. \Yestwood. "Winthrop and 
TVoburn. 



48 



PROSECUTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OP THE LAW RELATING 
TO POOD AND DRUGS. 



Twenty convictions were secured during the month of March, 1909, 
for selling adulterated food., as follows : — 



No. 


Name of Defendant. 


Place. 


Character of Article sold. 


1 


Felix Russo, . . . . Boston, . 


Cider. 1 




2 


Morris Goldman, 






Boston, . 






Hamburg steak.' 




3 


Herman H. Hescamp, 






Boston, . 






Hamburg steak. 1 




4 


Herman H. Hescamp, 






Boston, . 




Hamburg steak. 1 




5 


William D. Halward, 






Boston, . 






Hamburg steak. 1 




6 


David Reid, 






Boston, . 






Hamburg steak. 1 




7 


Spiros Kanzias, . 








Dorchester, 






Maple sugar - 




8 


James Paganis, . 








Ipswich, 






Maple sugar. - 




9 


Frank Chapman, 








Dunstable, 






11.24) . 3 


10 


Otto Minzner, 








Methuen, 






Milk (total solids, 


11.65) . 4 


11 


Frank 0. Rea, 








North Andover, 




Milk (total solids 


10.88) . 


12 


Michael Boscuzzo, 








Newburyport, 




Olive oil. 2 




13 


William Canelos, 








Ipswich, 


Olive oil. 2 




14 


Alfonzo Guido, . 








Boston, . 






Olive oil. 2 




15 


Nicklis Kintgios, 








Ipswich, 






Olive oil. 2 




16 


Joseph Kohn, 








Salem, . 






Olive oil. 2 




17 


Michael Kotrosos, 








Boston, . 






Olive oil. 2 




18 


Angelo Acerra, . 








Boston, . 




Sausage. 1 




19 


Valentine Dooley, 








Salem, . 




Sausage. 1 




20 


Cro Giordano, 








Boston, . 




Sausage. 1 





i Contained a preservative. 
2 Adulterated. 



a Watered. 
4 Appealed. 



Fines imposed, $450. 



49 



© «^ <u » c ' nf Ho © &* 



U\ U K (H >H . 

cd cd cd cd cp ■*-' v- *? 

cd rt rt ef cc! cd ^ qj 
fc: £ £ £ Es o o o 

Ti T3 rp "p 73 "- 1 >-i (_ 

'CP^rprp ft p- ft 

3 "2 "3 3 "B © <« O Jrf ,-. 

'S'S'g'g'gM a^ar 

.S .2 a .3 .2 +i -'p -^ 

CBrt'^cSrtc-aJ'tl®^ 
p P t? S P H^Ovh 

ooSoo','fl..g,. 

...... . - . - p jij t^ ,i*! ■!-» 

.; xi Tjj • <b w S M o 

cdcd^cdcd,.,.:..^ 

U U H h ftn 5,111 ^ 

ft ft » ft ftco , c , 

CC H >A ^ .r« 



a^«. 



©© • i-H© 1 
HH»rlH _cM ,cO 



a 00 
r-l 
■P t3 



P M 

cd « 

'"V, a 

® CD 

■a ft 






cd "o 

J - 9 o 



® cB 



CD <D co 



ft-ft- 



5 ^ i a 

0) ft 
ftCC 






bjj « M 



a c p = 



eoaiiaoooo®® p 
f _ 1) __ (i , ,_, , . , +^ ,— , -^ , , P 

_cjc3o3*o3cj2es2' 3 '2 

O O O O O O P 1 O P- O <" 

HHHEhHH H. H 



_ £'3 2 
5Sp--2 

O co o m 



P ~ 

CD <D ei 2~* 

O o - P^3 

"P •— CD 

tH H ft e3 -M 

ID CD CO +3 gj 

ftftO p ^, 

t-t-ft-O 



t3 •'S .73 






-* <P iH 



© O'o 



i^-p ^ 



o a o 



, .—* CJ ^ ,. ^ O 

: 5 w c o o 



1 ft- 



r ft- 



co _-« 
CD g - 

2S ^ 

,2 p -p 

o ^J3 
£2 ® 

O p Pi 

tl ? H 

c« OJO c3 

WOW 



o p 

S 5 



p c 

cd ^5 

W o 



ftn Q 



co O •— 

CO -M O 

CO CO «H 

I " 
l#i ~ - 

<s 9 >» 



O p 
CO c* 



^3 .2 S 



_- O ft 

§m a 

■P CO g 

s ^ft^ ^» 

<c p 

go .. 

cS 



bC,w 



c3 .rt o ■ 

or o • 



cc .™ 



J 2 



>^ J-3 *^ H 

Q ft- OQ 



§ a s 

P o o 
O o O 



n c3 



§ o 



^.P CD 



8 «-^ S 

J^ 5 C3 o ^ CD 



C5 



+J CD- 

fc-'p ^ 

CD pCC 
cti •— " u 



M 



c«"^-r 

ag| 

^p H « 

CDQ.-. 
. P 

prhft- 
£ > s 
cOp 

.2 2 2 

555 



< 

>*8 

-~ •- 

*3 2 * 

S Pi 00 

(St-iS 

2 ® - 

CD p fc- 

oft, a 
- >>>> 

Ss 9 
s p-r 

o « 

<£* 






CD CD ^ 



rpr^i 


P- 


b9 


O 


o 


hB 


be 










«H 


«w 




« 


O 


O ^ 




CD 

1-. 


CD 


i? 


p 





P 














U 


U 


- 


M 


c 


G 














HHPhW 



j3 .P.- E — 



oq n M 



P3 ft3 




M 


CO 












-^ -tJ 






»o. 


o 




O CD 


u 




-, == cr 


ej 


SS 


2 * 


<s 


o o 


P *J CD 












ciXh 

&W-- 




— 
p 


X 


X 

S 


> > 


M W 




i— i 


Q 




CO 



o o 



■gv, Q 

soa 



p a p p cd 

C^ ■* •* -* CC rH I— 

eo cc tH t- t- _ eo 

a; -^ti io jo mo ct* 03 



ft-cuft- ft- 

c- ro L- ^H 



50 



INSPECTION OF DAIRIES. 



During Hie month of March, 1909, 
following places : — 



1G0 dairies were examined in the 



Place. 


Number 
examined. 


Number found 

to present 

no Objectionable 

Features. 


Per Cent. 


Number to 

which Letters 

were sent. 


Per Cent. 


Acton, . 












Third inspection, 




1 


- 


- 


1 


100.00 


Dighton, 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Second inspection, 




1 


- 


- 


1 


100.00 


Dunstable, . 




1 


- 


- 


1 


100.00 


Second inspection, 




2 


1 


50.00 


1 


50.00 


Groton, 




4 


3 


75.00 


1 


25.00 


Second inspection, 




22 


9 


40.91 


13 


59.09 


Harvard, 




!) 


2 


22.22 


7 


77.78 


Second inspection, 




58 


16 


27.59 


42 


72.41 


Littleton, 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Second inspection, 




1 


- 


- 


1 


100 00 


Third inspection, 




1 


- 


- 


1 


100.00 


Pepperell, 




5 


3 


60.00 


2 


40.00 


Second inspection, 




23 


14 


60 87 


9 


39.13 


Princeton, 




2 


- 


- 


2 


100 00 


Second inspection, 




15 


9 


60.00 


6 


40.00 


Townsend, . 




4 


- 


- 


4 


100.00 


Second inspection, 




11 


10 


90.91 


1 


9.09 



Total number of dairies examined, 160 

Number found to be free from objectionable conditions, 67 

Number to which letters were sent, 93 

Total number of conditions to which attention was called, 342 

Percentage of dairies which passed inspection, 41.88 

The names of the owners of dairies found to be worthy of commenda- 
tion follow : — 

Dunstable. 

Tolles, Mrs. Edla ' 



Bancroft, General William 

A.', 2 
Benedict, P. J. 1 
T'.owles, H. D. 1 
Clough, T. R.' 

Anderson, E. 
Bigelow, J. R. 1 
Brown, A. M. 1 
Davran, John H. 1 
Dickinson, 1). H. 1 , ' 
Gale, George G. 1 



Groton. 

Graves, Joseph ', 2 
Hawks, J. R. 
Lawrence, James 
Peabody, William A. 1 

Harvard. 

(loss, Bliss (The Shakers) 
Green, Walter ' 
Hutchinson, A. A.', a 
King, W. E." 
Petersen, Peter ' 
Priest, B. J.' 



Shattuck, H.\ 2 
Vining, Miss Floretta ', 
Whitehill, William H. 
Woods, W. A. 1 



Skillings, H. A. 1 
Sprague, C E.\ '- 
Sprague, Frank ' 
Turner, A. H. 1 
Warner, Mrs. M. 1 , 
Willard. S. P.' 



Second inspection. 



- Reported favorably on Brat inspection as well. 



51 



Adams, G. W. 1 , 2 
Bancroft, S. P.', 
Blood, C. M.' 
Chase, Edgar 
Deunen, C. A. 1 
Dennen, W. F. 1 



Brooks, W. S. 1 
Bryant, W. H. 1 
Clark, J. W.' 



Pcpperell. 

Gilson, J. H.', - 
Herrod, W. A.', - 
Hill, Courtney 
Legg, W. E. A.' 
Maynard, J. W.\ 2 
Pierce, W. E. 1 

Princeton. 

Cronin, B. 1 
Crowell, J. A.' 
Downey, M. 1 , 2 



Richardson, E Et. 
Bobbins, fleorge L. 
Bhattnck, George E. 

Smith, Geor^t; L. 1 
Wright, F. O.', * 



Gates, M.' 
Olsen, Alfred', 2 
Way, Frank ' 



Barber, O. D.', 2 
Beckonert, G. H. 
Campbell, E. 1 
Kelley, H. L. 1 , 2 



Toivnsend. 



Kendall, G. H. 1 
King, G. E. 1 

Scales, A. 1 , 2 



Stickney, C. A. 1 
Townsend Town Farm ' 
Whitcomb, G. L.' 



PROPRIETARY PREPARATIONS ADVERTISED AS UNSALA- 
BLE IN JANUARY, 1909. 



White Pine Expectorant with Tar. George A. Miller, Pharmacist, S53 
Main Street, corner Austin, Cambridge, Mass. (Contains alcohol. Xot 
properly labeled.) 

Professor Penney's Body Regulator. Prepared only by Prof. H. C. 
Penney, 518 Columbus Avenue, Boston, Mass. (No statement of the per- 
centage of alcohol.) 



PROPRIETARY PREPARATIONS ADVERTISED AS UNSALA- 
BLE IN MARCH, 1909. 

(No statement of the percentage of alcohol.) 



Elixir of Riga. Russian liquor. M. Strasdowsky. 

Dr. Wilson's Wine of Cod Liver Oil with Malt, Wild Cherry and Hypo- 
phosphites. The Walker-Rintels Drug Company, 166 Summer Street, op- 
posite South Station, Boston, Mass. 

Larkin Root Beer Extract. Larkin Company, pure food chemists. Es- 
tablished 1875. Buffalo, U. S. A. 

Rocko-Ryo: Rock and Rye Compound. E. E. Gray Company, distributors. 
Boston, Mass. Charles L. Richardson & Co., distributers, Boston, Mass. 



i Second inspection. 



Reported favorably on first, inspection as well. 



52 

Horehound, Rock and Rye. Prepared by S. F. Petts & Co., 237 Friend 
Street, 144 and 14S Canal Street, Boston, Mass. 

Hires. (A root beer extract.) Prepared and put up only by The Charles 
E. Hires Company, Philadelphia, Pa., U. S. A. 

Dr. Swett's Root Beer Extract. Prepared by The Br. Geo. W. Swett 
Root Beer Company, corner Albany and Harvard streets, Boston. 

Indian Root Beer Extract. Prepared by Baker Extract Company. Lab- 
oratories, Springfield, Mass., and Portland, Me. 

Bryant's Root Beer. (A root beer extract.) The Michigan Drug Com- 
pany, 26-3S Congress Street, East, Detroit, Mich. 

Chionia. Prepared exclusively for physicians' prescriptions. Peacock 
Chemical Company, St. Louis. 



PROPRIETARY PREPARATIONS ADVERTISED AS UNSALA- 
BLE DURING 1908. 



Mrs. Winslow's Soothing Syrup. The Anglo-American Drug Company, 
215-217 Fulton Street, New York City. (Contained morphine in excess of 
the amount stated on the label.) 

Kopp's " Baby's Friend : " The King of Baby Soothers. Mrs. J. A. Kopp, 
sole proprietor; C. Robert Kopp, manufacturing chemist, York, Pa. (Con- 
tained morphine in excess of the amount stated on the label.) 

Dr. Coderre's Infants' Syrup (Sirop des Enfants du Dr. Coderre). (No 
statement of the amount of morphine.) 

Chamberlain's Mentholated Codeine. W. H. Chamberlain, 73 Green Street, 
Boston; 357 Adams Street, Dorchester, Mass. (Xo statement as to the 
presence and amount of codeine.) 

Robustine. Con Keefe, 8-10 Cambridge Street, Boston. (Xo statement 
of the percentage of alcohol.) 

Rock, Rye and Honey: the Great French Remedy. Edward Heffernan, 
sole proprietor, Lynn, Mass. (Xo statement of the percentage of alcohol.) 

Superior Headache Powders. Choate Drug and Chemical Company, man- 
ufacturing chemists, Bowdoin Square, Boston. (Incorrect statement of the 
amount of acetanilid.) 

The labels of the following preparations gave no indication as to the 
presence and amount of acetanilid contained therein: — 

Quick Relief Headache Konseals. Henry Adams & Co., pharmacists, 
Amherst, Mass., and 429 Main Street, Springfield. Mass. 

Chamberlain's Headache Powders. W. H. Chamberlain, Ph.G., sole pro- 
prietor, 357 Adams Slice!, corner Packman. Dorchester, Mass. 



53 

Caffeline Headache Tablets. \V. T. Cummings, pharmacist, L6 I 
Street, Winchendon, Mass. 
Dr. Davis' Anti-Headache or Half-Hour HeadaHic Sealer. Dr. N. C. 

Davis, Indianapolis, Ind. 

"Omega" Headache Tablets. Dodge's Pharmacy, 645 Broadway, ■ 

Chestnut Street, Everett, Mass. 

"Funny How Quick" Headache and Neuralgia Cure. ''Funny lb.. 
Quick Company," Box 485, Lynn, Mass. 

Headache Powders. A. T. Luscomb, apothecary, 449 Tremont Street, 
Boston. 

Munkley's Improved Headache Powders. Munkley & Co., pliarm. 
507 Tremont Street, corner Berkeley, Boston. 

Dr. Paxton's Headache and Neuralgia Cure. Dr. Paxton's Medical Com- 
pany, Troy, N. Y. 

Standard Headache Cura. Made by the Standard Drug Company. Three 
stores: Hoffman pharmacy, corner Berkeley Street and Columbus Avenue; 
Falmouth pharmacy, corner Falmouth and Norway streets ; Colonial phar- 
macy, corner Berkeley and Tremont streets, Boston. 

The following preparations contained cocaine : — 

Celerina. Rio Chemical Company, New York. 

A No. 1 Catarrh Cure. Standard Remedy Company, Boston, Mass. 

Dr. R. B. Waite's Antiseptic Local Anaesthetic for Painless Operations in 
All Minor Surgery. The Antidolar Manufacturing Company, Springville, 
Erie County, N. Y. 

As-Ma-Syde. Asthma Remedy and Manufacturing Company. Tremont 
Temple, Boston, Mass. 

Burgundia Coca. The Burgundia-Coca Company. New Yoi'k, London, 
Mexico. J. Morning-star, sole agent for the United States and Canada. 4S 
Park Place, New York. 

Cocaine-containing powder, unlabeled. 

Cocaine-containing catarrh snuff, unlabeled. 

Nichols Compound Kola Cordial. Billings, Clapp & Co., manufacturing 
chemists, Boston. 

The Ruby Catarrh Powder. Standard Remedy Company, Providence, 
R. I. 

PROPRIETARY PREPARATIONS; PROHIBITION OP SALE 

REMOVED. 



The following-named preparations, as now presented to the trade. 
being no longer in conflict with the provisions of chapter 386 of the 
Acts of 1906, may be sold at retail : — 



54: 

Stearns' Wine (Vinura Olei Morrhuae, Stearns). Stearns' Wine of Cod 
Liver Oil with Peptonate of Iron. Frederick Stearns & Co., manufacturing 
pharmacists, Detroit, U. S. A., Windsor, Ont., Can. 

Chionia. Prepared exclusively for physicians' prescriptions. Peacock 
Chemical Company, St. Louis. 

Celerina. Rio Chemical Company, New York. 

Hires. (A root beer extract.) The Charles E. Hires Company, Philadel- 
phia, Pa. 

ENFORCEMENT OF THE STATUTES RELATIVE TO THE 
MANUFACTURE OF CLOTHING IN TENEMENTS AND 
DWELLINGS. 



Eevised Laws, chapter 106, section 56, as amended by chapter 238 
of the Acts of 1905, and later by section 5, chapter 537 of the Acts of 
1907, provides that : — 

Every person, firm or corporation hiring, employing or contracting with 
a member of a family holding a license under this section for the making, 
altering, repairing or finishing of garments or wearing apparel to be done 
outside the premises of such person, firm or corporation, shall keep a 
register of the names and addresses plainly written in English of the per- 
sons so hired, employed or contracted with, and shall forward a copy of 
such register once a month to the state board of health. 

The State Inspector of Health of District No. 5 instituted court pro- 
ceedings against the firm of Smith & Cohen, 9 Friend Street, Boston, 
on two counts : ( 1 ) for giving work to a member of a family in a tene- 
ment house who had no license; (2) for not keeping a register of the 
names of their tenement workers. Conviction was obtained before 
Judge Wentworth, March 30. The defendants were fined $200, each 
partner being fined $50 on each of the two counts. They appealed. 

THE COMPOSITION OF THE MILK ON SALE IN MASSA- 
CHUSETTS. 



By Hermann C. Lythgoe. 



It is manifestly impossible to arrive at the exact composition of the 
average milk on sale in this State for several reasons: there is no way 
of arriving at a conclusion except by a study of the samples collected 
by inspectors, and inspections as a rule are naturally more frequent in 
localities where milk is most extensively adulterated and least where 
the sale of a high quality of milk is the rule. Owing to the increased 



.).) 



demand in summer resort cities find towns the milk on sale in I dim- 
mer months is extensively adulterated, while that supplied in the wi 
is of good quality as a rule. The character of the milk rariee with 
the locality; thus milk on sale in towns is better than milk sold in 
cities, and the milk of the western part is superior to that of the eastern 
part of the State. The quality of milk varies with the breed. I 
evident, therefore, that any conclusions drawn from the work of the 
food inspection department of the Massachusetts State Board of Health 
will point to the sale of a lower average quality of milk than is actually 
the case. 

Since August, 1908 (the present milk standard went into effect July 
13, 1908), 2,487 samples have been examined in the food laboratory of 
this Board, and the results of these examinations are reported in Table I. 



Table I. — Summary of Analyses of Samples of Milk examined during 

Eight Months. 





1908. 


1909. 




Aug. 


Sept. 


Oct. 


Nov. 


Dec. 


Jan. Feb. Mar. Totals. 


Above 15 per cent., . 
Between 14 per cent, and 15 per 

Between 13 per cent, and 14 per 
cent., ..... 

Between 12.15 per cent, and 13 
percent., .... 

Between 11 percent, and 12.15 
per cent 

Between 10 per cent, and 11 per 

Between 9 per cent, and 10 per 
Between 8 per cent, and 9 per 
Below 8 per cent., . 


6 

15 
43 
99 
106 
33 
2 

2 

4 


7 
8 

72 

119 

37 

14 

2 


7 

35 

159 

147 

79 

9 

4 

2 


10 

29 

142 

162 

42 

8 

2 


3 

22 

85 

119 

36 

5 
4 
2 


3 

27 

92 

109 

34 

2 

5 

1 
1 


5 

17 

54 

96 

27 

3 

4 

1 


17 

42 

123 

112 

30 

6 

3 

1 


58 
195 

770 

963 

391 

70 

26 

7 

7 


Totals, .... 


300 


259 


442 I 395 


276 


274 | 207 j 334 2,487 



A study of this table, which includes many samples of skimmed and 
watered milk, shows that 95.4 per cent, of the samples were above 11 
per cent, in total solids, 79.7 per cent, were above 12.15 per cent, total 
solids and 41 per cent, were above 13 per cent, total solids. If nearly 
80 per cent, of the samples collected, most of which had passed through 
two or more hands before being taken by the inspector, were above the 
standard, there is no reason why the other 20 per cent, could not have 
been so. 



56 



Table IT. — Averages of Samples of Milk collected. 





Xumter 


Average 


Average 


Number 


Average 


Average 




of 


Total solids 


Fat 


of 


Total Solids 


Hat 




Samples.' 


(Per Cent.)- 


(I'erCent.). 


Samples. 2 


(PerCent.). 


(PerCent.). 


Julv, 1908, ... 340 


12 30 




308 


12.57 




August. 1908, . 




293 


12.17 


- 


252 


12.49 


- 


September, 1908, 




297 


12.62 


- 


280 


1 12.67 


- 


October. 1908, . 




388 


12.79 


- 


376 


12 84 


- 


November, 1908, 




387 


12 98 


- 


365 


13.06 


- 


December, 1908, 




259 


12 65 


3.85 


248 


12.77 


3.92 


January, 1909, . 




274 


12 67 


3.72 


263 


12.77 


3.83 


February. 1909, 




201 


12.74 


3.94 


192 


12.85 


4.04 


March, 1909, . 




291 


13.09 


4.18 


283 


13.19 


4.25 





i Total samples collected exclusive of cream and known purity samples. 
- Above samples exclusive of those declared skimmed and watered. 

Table II. gives the averages of samples collected between July 1, 1908, 
and March 31, 1909. In making these averages no figures were used 
except those obtained from samples less than IT per cent, in total solids 
collected by inspectors from stores, milk teams, or producers supplying 
wholesale or retail milk dealers. One column was compiled from all the 
samples collected as described, while the other column contains results 
from those which could not be declared adulterated. In looking over the 
figures for total solids we find the lowest average to be above the standard 
This figure, 12.17 per cent, in August, is the average of 293 samples, 
of which 41, or 14 per cent., were either adulterated or skimmed 3 milk. 
Eliminating the samples declared skimmed and watered, the lowest 
average total solids was 12.49 per cent., during August, and the highest 
13.19 per cent., in March. The average percentage of fat, which can be 
reported only since December, is in the neighborhood of 4 per cent. 

In the annual report of the State Board of Health for 1899, page 616, 
are reported figures showing the composition of the milk on sale during 
December, 1898, and June, 1899. In compiling these figures, samples 
between 10.75 per cent, and 17 per cent, solids were used, and the 
average total solids of 502 samples obtained during December, 1898, 
was found to be 13.32 per cent., with an average fat of 4.42 per cent. 
The average total solids of 387 samples collected in June, 1899, was 
found to be 12.65 per cent., and the average fat 4.06 per cent. These 
figures were more nearly a correct average of the milk sold in the State 
than those reported for the past year, as special pains were taken to 
collect the samples uniformly throughout the State. 

Taking into account the largo number of inspections in suspected 
localities, it ifi fair to presume that the average milk sold in this State 
is somewhat better than that shown by the figures reported, and its total 
solids would be at least 13 per cent., with a fat of at least 4 per cent. 

a A large number of samples of skimmed milk are collected, most of which are above the 
standard, although the solids may be as low as 9.4 percent. These samples are not to be con- 
sidered as adulterated, yet they lower the average total solids. 



r ill 13 



MONTHLY m BULLETIN 



OF THE 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH 



OF 



MASSACHUSETTS. 



An official publication of the State Board of Health of Massachusetts, issued monthly 
from the office of the Board, 145 State House, Boston, Mass. 



New Series. APRIL, 1909. Vol. 4. No. 4. 



Entered at the Post-office at Boston, Feb. 15, 1906, as Second-class Matter. Act 

of July 16, 1894. 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. 



HENRY P. WALCOTT, M.D., Cambridge, Chairman. 



JULIAN A. MEAD, M.D., WATERTOWN. 
HIRAM F. MILLS, C.E., Lawrence. 
GERARD C. TOBEY, ESQ., Wareham. 



JAMES W. HULL, PlTTSFIELD. 
CHARLES H. PORTER, QDTNCY. 
ROBERT W. LOVETT, M.D., Boston. 



MARK W. RICHARDSON, M.D., Secretary. 



BOSTON: 

WRIGHT & POTTER PRINTING CO., STATE PRINTERS, 

18 Post Office Square. 

1909. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



Pagk 

Weekly returns of deaths from cities and towns of more than 10,000 population, . 59 

Weekly returns of deaths from certain infectious diseases, 63 

Weekly returns of cases of infectious diseases 64 

Monthly report on inspection of food and drugs, 65 

Prosecutions for violations of the law relating to food and drugs, .... 66 

List of adulterated foods, etc., for April, 1909, 67 

The house fly as an agent in the dissemination of infectious diseases, ... 68 

Ophthalmia neonatorum, preventive treatment, law, etc., ..... 72 

Law relative to supervision of water companies, ....... 74 

Amendment of law relative to the sale of cocaine 75 

Proprietary preparations advertised as unsalable in 1908, from which the prohibi- 
tion was afterwards removed, 76 

Proprietary preparations advertised as unsalable in April, 1909, .... 76 

Proprietary preparations : prohibition of sale removed, 76 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CITIES AND TOWNS 
OF MORE THAN 10,000 POPULATION. 









W 


BEE IONIUM 


J Al'Kii. 8, 


1909. 














ji 




> 
S 

u 



"3 




DlATBI 


moti — 


CITIES AND TOWNS. 


~z. 


M 

s . 

3 ? 




aj 


if 






«j"§ 


"O 


«2 


B.3 » 


a 


m 


8 


3^ 


«■ 




"5 « 


is 


g* 


— i a 

t.v2 4) 


gfl 


2 

2 


S 


d 






B- 


a 


a 


£ 


-0 


a. 


a 


£' 


X 


Boston, 


624,491 


240 


48 


112 


54 


19 


5 




3 


Worcester, 








136,476 


39 


6 


18 


10 


7 




_ 




Fall River, 








106,486 


57 


18 


24 


15 


4 


_ 


1 




Cambridge, 








102,112 


35 


9 


18 


8 


5 


_ 






Lowell, 








96,380 


31 


10 


12 


8 


3 


_ 


1 




New Bedford, 








85,516 


31 


- 


14 


11 


3 


_ 




_ 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


31 


9 


8 


- 


4 


2 


_ 


_ 


Springfield, 








84,237 


29 


6 


6 


6 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


28 


8 


9 


5 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


Somerville, 








76,049 


20 


3 


9 


5 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


13 


4 


6 


4 


_ 


_ 


_ 


2 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


20 


13 


11 


6 


5 


_ 


_ 




Maiden, 








41,941 


17 


4 


4 


3 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


12 


3 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Newton, 








39,642 


11 


3 


3 


3 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Salem, 








39,019 


19 


3 


4 


3 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


13 


2 


8 


8 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


7 


1 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Everett, 








33,597 


9 


5 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Quincy, 








31,937 


9 


2 


3 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


13 


5 


9 


5 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


11 


5 


5 


4 


_ 


1 


_ 


_ 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


9 


3 


5 


1 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


8 


1 


2 


_ 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


North Adams, 








22,150 


11 


6 


2 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Northampton, 








21,075 


9 


1 














Chicopee, . 








21,049 


10 


7 


3 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


Med ford, . 








20,921 


9 


- 


1 


1 


_ 




_ 


_ 


Beverly, 








16,386 


4 


1 


3 


2 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


Leominster, 








16,030 


4 


2 


2 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


9 


2 


4 


_ 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Melrose, 








15,459 


3 





2 


2 


_ 




_ 


_ 


Newbury port, 








14,834 


9 


- 


6 


5 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Revere, 








14,820 


6 


1 


1 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


6 


2 


4 


3 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


7 


1 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


Marlborough, . 








14,456 


3 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Attleborough, . 








13,913 


3 


1 














Adams, 








13,685 


5 


- 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Clinton, 








13,105 


9 


5 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


6 


1 


2 


- 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Milford, . 








12,722 


3 


1 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


- 


_ 


Watertown, 








12,676 


10 


4 














Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


4 


- 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


2 

















Framingham, . 








11,749 


4 


- 


1 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 




_ 


_ 


_ 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


_ 


- 




_ 


- 


_ 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


2 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


6 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,379,468 



859 


207 


331 


184 


72 


10 


2 



1 The populations were estimated upon the rate of growth from 1900 to 1905. Those of Taunton, 
Gloucester, North Adams and Clinton were allowed to stand as in 1905, having- shown no increase 
during the five-year period. The gain in the population of Lowell is due to the annexation of a 
part of the town of Tewksbury. The population of Lawrence by the census of 1905 was 70,060, but. 
owing to the building of the new Wood and Arlington mills, an increase of about S,000 is estimated 
by the Lawrence board of health, or 78,000. 



(30 



Week ending April 10, 1909. 





, 


= 


o 












« 


~- 


£ 




Death 


FROM — 




fcJoi 

1 




u 












eJ i 


be 






u 




CITIES AND TOWNS. 


— *- 


a 


c 


~2 


c 

3 s 




a 


> 






— •a 






« = . 






8 


— ■*■ 






■A a> 


■t-'.c 




O-c io 














eg 
o a 








55 


5 


a. 


a 


e 

4) 




i. 


M 


« 


s 


«4 


E 


5 


e< 


£ 


Boston, 


624,491 


290 


63 


109 


48 


27 


1 


2 


2 


Worcester, 








136,476 


43 


7 


14 


9 


3 


- 


1 


_ 


Fall River, 








106,486 


48 


16 


17 


11 


3 


- 


- 


_ 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


28 


9 


13 


9 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


34 


13 


10 


8 


2 


- 


_ 


_ 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


30 


7 


7 


4 


2 


- 


1 


_ 


Lynn,. 








84,623 


31 


8 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


27 


9 


5 


1 


2 


1 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


24 


5 


8 


5 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Sornerville, 








76,049 


26 


7 


5 


1 


1 


1 


- 


1 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


13 


5 


7 


4 


- 


- 


- 


1 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


16 


6 


7 


4 


1 


1 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


14 


2 


5 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


11 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


11 


5 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


16 


5 


5 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


12 


1 


5 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


- 


Fitch burg, . 








34,263 


5 


1 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


11 


2 


4 


1 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


7 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


11 


2 


.4 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


1 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


10 


3 


4 


3 


- 


_ 


- 


1 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


7 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


8 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


8 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


9 


4 


4 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Northampton, 








21,075 


7 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


13 


6 


3 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Med ford, . 








20,921 


6 


- 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


6 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


3 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


6 





2 


- 


o 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


6 


1 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Woburn , . 








14,522 


2 





1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


6 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


2 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


2 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


5 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


8 





1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, 








12,722 


6 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Water town, 








12,676 


6 


4 


1 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


2 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


5 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, . 








11,749 


3 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


4 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


2 


- 


1 


"! 


1 


- 


- 


~ 


Recajritulatio 


n. 








Total of reporting towns, 


2,379,468 


857 


207 


260 


135 


62 1 


6 


4 


6 



Gl 



Week ending April 17, 1909. 











wg 







I)KATI!S KROM — 




= k 


M 






-- 




CITIES AND TOWNS. 


c,o 


a 


g 


**Q 


3 » 




J 


> 
- 






5 * 


to 


2 >■* 


s = • 


^3 
2 » 


■2 




-- 
3 


i 




3 S 


o« 


g|H 


Hi 


S-* 


2 


a 




i 




6. 


« 


Q 


c- 


"- 


■« 


2 


"P. 


Boston 


624,491 


244 


60 


94 


40 


22 


4 




4 


Worcester, 








136,476 


46 


11 


16 


11 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


42 


17 


18 


7 


4 


- 


- 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


25 


6 


10 


6 


4 


- 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


39 


14 


15 


14 


— 


1 


- 


- 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


26 


11 


7 


4 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


19 


5 


3 


- 


2 


1 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


29 


6 


11 


8 


2 


1 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


24 


12 


11 


4 


1 


2 


- 


i 


Somerville, 








76,049 


12 


1 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


12 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


i 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


17 


11 


6 


- 


1 


1 


1 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


17 


5 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


13 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


14 


3 


4 


3 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


20 


4 


5 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


15 


- 


3 


1 


1 


' - 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


8 


3 


4 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


6 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


10 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


9 


1 


4 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


5 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


11 


3 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


7 


1 


2 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


6 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


11 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


8 


3 


3 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


5 


2 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, . 








16,386 


3 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


2 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


6 


1 


3 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


5 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


4 


3 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


i 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


5 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


2 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


3 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


3 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


3 


1 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


5 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


2 





2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, . 








12,722 


3 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


8 


3 


6 


4 


1 


- 


- 


i 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


2 


2 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


4 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


6 


1 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


4 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 



















Recajritulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,379,468 775 



206 258 



137 53 11 



62 



Week ending Apkil 24, 1909. 











S 


m 


u 


•3 




Deaths 


ntoM — 


CITIES AND TOWNS. 


hk 






— > 








I« 


■ i 


&o * 


-i 


s 


z 


3 — 


g 




z- z 


Ij 


— 3 


lii 




2 




.= 


= 






-.— 


©•** 


s«* 


0« 








- 




- 


— 


= 




< 


- 


— 


H 


S 


Boston, ! 624,491 


226 


69 


91 


34 


26 


2 


1 


5 


Worcester, 








136,476 


31 


11 


9 


6 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


Fall River, 








106,486 


35 


8 


22 


13 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


28 


5 


5 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


30 


7 


11 


4 


3 


- 


2 


- 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


29 


9 


10 


5 


5 


- 


- 


_ 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


21 


5 


1 












Springfield, 








84,237 


25 


3 


7 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


36 


11 


12 


8 


3 


- 


- 


1 


Somerville, 








76,049 


19 


2 


6 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


7 


1 


3 


- 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


17 


7 


8 


3 


1 


2 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


11 


1 


5 


2 


3 


- 


- 


_ 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


16 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


10 


2 


5 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


10 


2 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


11 


3 


4 


1 


2 


- 


- 


_ 


Fitchburg, . 








34,263 


8 


3 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, . 








33,597 


7 


— 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


10 


5 


5 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


14 


2 


6 


1 


3 


1 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


6 


1 


4 


2 


2 


- 


- 


_ 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


8 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


8 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


6 


- 


3 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


9 


1 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


5 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Med ford, . 








20,921 


7 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


4 

















Melrose, 








15,459 


5 


2 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


2 


1 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


2 


- 


1 












Westfield, . 








14,750 


4 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, 








14,522 


5 


1 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


1 

















Adams, 








13,685 


3 


1 


1 












Clinton, 








13,105 


9 





1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


5 


1 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, . 








12,722 


2 

















Watertown, 








12,676 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


2 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


1 


o 














Framingham, 








11,749 


4 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


2 













- 




Greenfield, 




10,140 


3 


— 


- 


~ 


~ 


~ 


- 


~ 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,363,438 714 173 243 



110 I 63 



63 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CERTAIN INFECTIOUS 

DISEASES. 



Deaths from Infectious Diseases not specifically mentioned in 
above Tables during the Weeks of Apr: . IT an 

1909. 



DISEASE. 



Place. 



_ 



Apr. 3. Apr. 10. Apr. IT 



Cerebro-spinal meningitis. 


Beverly, 

Boston, 

Cambridge, 

Newton, 

Worcester, 




1 

1 2 

1 

1 


Q 


1 
1 


Scarlet fever, .... 


Boston. 
Brockton, . 
Chicopee, . 
Fall River, 
Lowell, 
Pittslield, . 
Somerville, 
Springfield, 




1 

1 

1 
1 


3 , 

_ 

1 
1 


2 
1 

! 

1 


Whooping cough, 


Brockton. . 

Cambridge. 

Clinton. 

Fall River. 

Fitchbnrg. 

Lowell. 

Medford, . 

Northampton. 

Qtiiney, 

Taunton. . 

Worcester, 




- 

1 

1 

_ 


■1 
1 


1 
1 

1 


1 
1 

1 
1 
1 



Ervsipelas. . 


Adams, 








1 




Boston. 


• II - 


4 


•: 


_ 




Fall River. 


1 


- 


- 


- 




Lawrence, . 


- 


- 


1 


- 




Lynu.. 


1 


- 


- 


- 




Springfield, 


. 


- 


- 


1 




\\ oLuirn. . 


1 


- 


- 


- 



Tuberculosis other than pulmo- 
narv. 



Boston . 
Brockton. . 
Cambridge, 
Gardner. . 
Holyoke, . 
Newbury port, 
Quincy, 
Revere. 



64 





DISEASE. 


riace. 


Week ending — 


















Apr. 3. 


Apr. 10. 


Apr. 17. 


Apr. 24. 


Meningitis 


other than cerebro- 


Framingham, . 


1 




_ 




spinal. 




Lynn, 


1 


1 


_ 


1 






Medford, . 




_ 




1 


Influenza, 




Boston, 


5 


5 


5 


3 






Haverhill, . 




1 


1 


1 






Holyoke, . 




1 


- 


- 






Medford, . 




1 


- 


- 






Springfield, 




- 


- 


1 






Taunton, . 




— 


1 


- 



WEEKLY RETURNS OP CASES OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES. 



Cases of Infectious Diseases reported during the 'Weeks of 
April 3, 10, 17 and 21, 1909. 

[Under the provisions of section 52 of chapter To of the Revised Laws.] 



Week ending — 




Apr. 24. 



Diphtheria, 

Measles, 

Scarlet fever, .... 

Typhoid fever, .... 
Tuberculosis, pulmonary, . 
Cerebro-spinal meningitis, . 
Whooping cough, .... 

Varicella, 

Erysipelas 

Mumps, 

Ophthalmia neonatorum, 
Tuberculosis other than pulmonary, 

Smallpox, 

Tetanus, 



145 

572 

194 

23 

174 

3 

42 

53 

1 

1 
2 



109 

549 

141 

14 

165 

2 

43 

39 

3 
1 
2 



150 

505 

170 

19 

153 

4 

91 

46 

1 

3 
3 
1 

1 



108 

522 

152 

22 

141 

9 

29 

42 

1 

1 

1 
1 



65 



MONTHLY REPORT ON INSPECTION OF FOOD AND DRUGS. 



The following summary presents the results of the examination of food 
and drugs made by the State Board of Health during the month of 
April, 1909 : — 



















Articles examined. 


Number 
found 
to be of 


adulterated 
or varying 


Total. 


Articles examined. 


Xumber 
found 
to be of 


adulterated 
or varying 


Total. 




Good 
Quality. 


Legal 
Standard. 






Good 

Quality. 


Legal 
Standard. 




Butter, . 


7 


_ 


7 


Maple syrup, 


2 


_ 


2 


Canned fruit and 








Meat products : — 








vegetables, 


8 


1 


9 


Hamburg steak, 


3 


1 


4 


Cheese, . 


2 


1 


3 


Mince meat, 


1 


- 


1 


Cider, . 


2 


- 


2 


Sausages, . 


9 


3 


12 


Cocoa, . 


4 


- 


4 


Milk, . 


175 


45 


220 


Condensed milk, . 


6 


- 


6 


Nonalcholic 








Cream, . 


14 


- 


14 


drinks, 


2 


- 


<> 


Drugs, . 


85 


46 


131 


Olive oil, 


18 


5 


23 


Extract of vanilla, 


' 2 


- 


2 


Pickles. 


1 


- 


1 


Grape juice, . 


4 


- 


4 


Salad dressing, . 


4 


- 


4 


Honey, . 


1 


- 


1 


Spices, . 


5 


- 


5 


Horse radish, 


3 


- 


3 


Table sauces, 


3 


3 


6 


Jams and jellies, . 


4 


- 


4 


Wine, . 


- 


2 


o 


Lard, 

Malt liquors, 


2 
5 


1 


3 
5 










Total, . 


388 


111 


499 


Maple sugar, 


16 


3 


19 











The samples of drugs found to be adulterated were: extract of 
liquorice, mercurial ointment, oxide of zinc ointment and proprietary 
medicines. 

The cities and towns in which samples were collected were : Amesbury, 
Ayer, Beverly, Boston, Brockton, Billerica, Braintree, Cambridge, Con- 
cord, Dedliam, Easton, Everett, Fall Eiver, Fitchburg, Foxborough, 
Gloucester, Harvard, Haverhill, Ipswich, Lawrence, Lowell, Lynn, 
Maiden, Marlborough, Maynard, Melrose, Medford, Milford, Xew Bed- 
ford, ISTewburyport, Northborough, North Beading, Peabody, Quincy, 
Salem, South Framingham, Springfield, Taunton,- Wakefield, Waltham,. 
Woburn and Worcester. 



66 



PROSECUTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW RELATING 
TO FOOD AND DRUGS. 



Twenty-seven convictions were secured during the month of April, 
1909, for selling adulterated food, as follows : — - 



No. 


Name of Defendant. 


Place. 


Character of Article sold. 


1 


Cornelius Keefe, .... 


Boston, . 


Cider (containing benzoic 
acid). 


2 


Cornelius Keefe, .... 


Boston, . 


Cider (containing benzoic 
acid) . 


3 


Charles Maspero, 


Dorchester, . 


Maple sugar (65 per cent, 
cane sugar). 1 


4 


Joseph Pacone, .... 


Quincy, . 


Maple sugar (80 per cent, 
cane sugar) . 


5 


Louis Sasserno, .... 


Dorchester, . 


Maple sugar (65 per cent, 
cane sugar) . 


6 


Arthur E. Dutton, 


Chelmsford, . 


Milk (total solids, 11.52).' 


7 


Jacob A. Dyer, .... 


South Braintree, . 


Milk (skimmed ; cans not 

marked) . 
Milk (total solids, 11.57). 


8 


Herbert L. Kimball, . 


Northborough, 


9 


Chas. H. Peloquin, 


Marlborough, 


Milk (total solids, 11.70) . 


10 


Edward A. Piper, 


Ashby, . 


Milk (skimmed ; cans not 
marked) . 


11 


Adelard J. Poudrier, . 


Marlborough, 


Milk (total solids, 11.66). 


12 


Olin E. Swan, .... 


South Framingham, 


Milk (total solids, 11.66). 


13 


William R Underhill, 


Ashby, . 


Milk (skimmed; cans not 
marked). 


14 


Edward C. Wright, . 


Chelmsford, . 


Milk (total solids, 10.49).' 


15 


Daniel P. Grosvenor, . 


Peabody, 


Mercurial ointment (30.2 
per cent. U. S. P) . 


16 


Mamad Effendi 


Peabody, 


Olive oil (contained 50 per 
cent, cotton-seed oil) . 


17 


Peter Kalelis, .... 


Peabody, 


Olive oil (contained 60 per 
cent, cotton-seed oil). 


18 


James Liacos, .... 


Peabody, 


Olive oil (wholly cotton- 
seed oil) . 


19 


Louis Sgouaas, .... 


Peabody, 


Olive oil (contained 80 per 
cent, cotton-seed oil). 


20 


Emanuel J. Sophos, . 


Peabody, 


Olive oil (contained 60 per 
cent, cotton-seed oil) . 


21 


Frank Bott 


Boston, . 


Strawberry preserve (con- 
tained salicylic acid). 


22 


Mederic Diegeant, 


Boston, . 


Sausage (preserved with 
sulphurous acid) . 


23 


Walker Armington, Jr., 


Worcester, 


Vinegar. 


24 


Max Israel, ..... 


Worcester, 


Vinegar. 


25 


Ulderic V. Viegeant, . 


Worcester, 


Vinegar, 


26 


Joe Keller 


Lowell, . 


Unstamped veal. 


27 


William S. McCarthy, 


Boston, . 


Unstamped veal. 



1 Appealed. 



Fines imposed, $530. 



61 



< 
c 

ft 
□ 

^ 

P 


c 

- 
- 

< 

- 

> 

- 

- 
c 

- 



n 

< 

< 

o 

BO 





- - c c 


— 


- 










D A • « 
























































■ 


I 










5 S S S 


t£ 


ii 












































































































3 3 3 3 


g 


g 




^ 


ja 














































^ z £ z 


l — 


^ 




_>■. 


> 


















•3 z z r . 


'- — 


— 




— 


u 






























J^ 


3 3 o a ~~ 


— ; 


3 




£ 


- 




•- - - ; 


>^s 


- 




a 


— 




- 


^ ri 










<: 


.J J, _ _ ~ 


i 






.z 


— 


~ 


5 f F r — • 


z~~ 


g 




~ . ■- 


.- 


■ 


Z o □ o S 


-— 5 


3 




2 — — 


"3 






— 










o 


3^r M 


r 




' 3 . 


c 






X 








: - 




- £ - z "~ 


_5 n 


X 
BQ 




^ S s 


s r 




i* i i x" 5 










— >: 














































3 3 


























X X X X — 


•— •— 


3 •— 


^ 


■— -3 •— 


■3 3" 




















































'-" 






















r* ~ r" r" X 


OQ 


'- 




Q ^ 


-- 








S 










































Z 




~ 








r . 






^ . 3 








5 


£ 




5 > 














C 5 
















•« 














a 




o 


— 




^ z 




= 














— 














O 


X 

x • • • • 


ge 


a 




^ 5 




S 


!* r 


£i 


d 




,2 




_2 




>i~ 


r- 




- i 


■ 3 
















i 


tp*4 


e ^ 


"g 




^ rfi 


Sg 




- : i gS-d 


- £ 


~" 




Q • 


x j: 
<- 


3 


5 - 1 x .5 _^ 


x ri 


~ 




.-: T- ~ 


x >a 


C3 

s 

c 

a 




"7i x 

= -5 


< 


> 


|1 ^ 


Z "g 


z* 




- 3C 








— ^ 


z 


g°|l| 


— 




2 


1?^ 


~^ 




ShISI 






> 


2^ — 3 


3 S 




|fe 


r- 




oow 


- = 








, 




• . ^ 


. - 








x 












o 


*^ 










£ 


™* 




3 


Q 


s 




. ^_, 


K4 




. — 


• ^* 


=. 


P 


Q 


c 




c 


"™ 


£ 














X 

o 


...... 


■ c 


f 




8 a 


. X 
3 -""S 




> 








3 1 X X 


a 

ts 

a 


. . . . s 


■ ■ X 


5- 




S B S ft • 

— X xCCw - s 




. .. _ .. 3- 


2 .r ■ 
3} x ~ 


l« 


-: 


C x "- • 
> •; -3 . 


SjK | 






























SSSSU 


OOD 


~< 




CC- 


e»p 


s ■ 
















i-r-M^X 












Bog 


5 23 £3 tr 5 


3 3 


= 




3; C^ M 


3 3 


= a 






£Q 




C IC — 


^1 3? 




c- ^ 


^ 




3i *. 3^ 


t- ~ 



68 



THE HOUSE FLY AS AN AGENT IN THE DISSEMINATION 
OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES.' 



By Theobald Smith, M.D., Pathologist of the Massachusetts State Board of 

Health. 



On being asked by onr vice-president, Dr. Durgin, to open a discus- 
sion on the house fly as an agent in the dissemination of infectious dis- 
eases, I consented with some reluctance, because my first-hand knowledge 
of this subject is slight. I realize that the matter is one of considerable 
importance, however, — one which cannot be too strongly brought to the 
attention of health officers, communities and individuals. 

It is hardly necessary to cite authorities on the capacity of the house 
fly to carry bacteria from one place to another. This capacity has been 
amply demonstrated and confirmed. The house fly is known to be 
strongly attracted by noisome odors. It hovers about and feeds on 
human excreta. It eats blood, pus, sputum and other pathological 
products. In fact, its habits are well adapted to favor the soiling of the 
exterior of its body, and to fill its interior with various species of dis- 
ease germs. Pathogenic bacteria have been demonstrated on its pro- 
boscis, its feet, in its digestive tract and its excreta, the well-known fly 
specks. 

The kinds of infections which it is best adapted to transport from 
place to place are typhoid, dysentery and Asiatic cholera. By seeding 
our foods, notably milk, with these germs, which it obtains from dejec- 
tions, it may cause small localized family epidemics. 

The bacilli of tuberculosis may also be disseminated by it. because the 
fly will feed on sputum, and the tubercle bacilli may pass alive through 
the digestive tract and appear in the fly specks. Dr. Lord found living 
tubercle bacilli in the excreta of flies fed with sputum fifteen days after 
they had been passed. The severe epidemics of typhoid in our camps 
during the Spanish-American war were attributed by the investigating 
commission to flies. There can be no doubt that the house fly is a po- 
tential danger in proportion to the number of individuals living in our 
cm ironment. 

I believe thai this position will hardly be questioned by any one to-day, 
and it is imt nr<v<sary to spend any more time on this aspect of the 
subject. The more important problem confronting us is. how to restrict 

' Reprinted from American Journal of Public Hygiene, August, 1908. Komi at .1 quarterly meet- 
ing of the Massachusetts Association ol Boards of Health, July 28, 1908. 



69 

and suppress this noxious insect. In order that the house fly 
controlled, we must know whore it breeds. The war upon mosqnil 
was made, not upon the winged insect, but upon the larval - the 

water. In the same way the war upon flies cannot be successfully wag 
with fly paper and fly traps, but it must be waged in the country of the 
enemy itself, against its breeding places. 

In order that we may obtain a better view of the enemy's territory, 
it will be necessary to broaden our remarks so as to include certain other 
flies as well. For our immediate purposes flies may be divided into the 
biting and non-biting flies. Among the former are the flies that infest 
domestic animals, — the horseflies and stable flies. Among these belong 
the dreaded Glossina species, which carry the trypanosomes of sleeping 
sickness and of several animal scourges. 

The biting flies are to be found chiefly in the country, where they 
congregate near barns and stables. Among the non-biting or sucking 
flies belong the house fly, the various flesh flies and blow flies which lay 
their eggs on decomposing flesh. 

Of these flies as carriers and inoculators of infection in our climate 
little is known, and therefore little can be said. They should, however, 
not be wholly neglected as causes of disease. Yeninger, in the Wiener 
Med. Woch. of 1906, reports a case of inoculation, — smallpox in an 
infant nine months old, who lived in a tenement across the' street 
from the smallpox division of the children's hospital in Vienna. The 
physician found the child with high fever and a smallpox pustule on 
the inner angle of the left eye corresponding to six or seven days' devel- 
opment. The child developed generalized smallpox two days later, and 
succumbed to it. Yeninger reasonably infers that nothing but a biting 
fly could have been responsible for this case. 

The development of these various species is practically the same, and 
resembles in a general way that of the mosquito. If in the breeding 
of the mosquito we replace water with putrefactive and fermenting ani- 
mal and vegetable matter, we will have a fairly correct picture of the 
life cycle of flies. They lay their eggs upon horse dung, cow dung, 
decaying vegetables, fresh meat, cheese, dead animals and human excreta. 
The larva? emerge from the egg and feed on the mass on which they 
were deposited. After a variable number of days they shut themselves 
into their skin, which forms a hard case (puparium) around them, and 
in it they are known as pupae. There they undergo that marvelous 
transformation into the winged insect. Different species of flies prefer 
different decomposing material. The blow flies prefer meat : the flesh 
flies, dead animals ; some, cow dung : others, horse dung. The house 
fly's chief breeding place is horse manure, but according to recent studies 



TO 

by Newstead in Liverpool, besides horse manure, spent hops, piggeries, 
old fermenting straw, paper, rags and other refuse, mixed with human 
excreta, contained the larva? of the house fly. Decaying vegetables, old 
straw mat tresses, rotten sacks in state of fermentation, also gave them 
sustenance. 

A single house fly lays one hundred and twenty to one hundred and 
forty eggs, each about one-sixteenth inch long. The larvae (or mag- - 
as they are commonly called) leave the egg earliest eight hours after 
laying. They mature in five to eight days, and then pupate. The pupae 
mature earliest in five to seven days. The adult fly requires, therefore, 
at least ten days (from the time of egg laying) to mature. 

Our relation to the pest of flies is best exemplified by the answer to 
the question, "What are flies for? This question we should always try 
to answer when we are endeavoring to destroy some species, for it fre- 
quently contains a solution of our difficulties, besides putting us on the 
right track towards further inquiries. Professor Comstock answers this 
question as follows: "Although the habits of these creatures, which 
revel in all kinds of filth, are very disgusting, we cannot help admiring 
that arrangement by which a mass of filth, instead of being left to poison 
the atmosphere, is transformed into myriads of living beings, whose 
swift flight and delicate forms lend life and beauty to the landscape." 

This means that they are scavengers prepared to remove decomposing 
and putrefying matter by converting it into living things. The same 
is true of the bacteria. They are the scavengers of nature, absolutely 
indispensable. Only a small per cent, of the many species have become 
parasites and disease germs. The house fly, unfortunately, by leaving 
th«' disgusting material upon which it normally feeds and entering 
human habitations and attacking our foods, lias become a nuisance and 
a danger. 

When we go into public restaurants in midsummer and are compelled 
to fight for our food with the myriads of house flies which we find there. 
alei en1 and invincible, we should ask ourselves. Where did 

these flies find a place to breed? What is the matter with this pi; 
or ill'' region immediately around it? 

If we were allowed to investigate, we should probably find one or 
more of three causes operating: negL - - some stable with 

accumulating horse manure, or a dump near by. At the seashore other 
species of flies find the dea - - thrown on shore good breeding 
grounds. 

The difficulties with garbage are several. It is not always regularly 
collected. The receptacles are nol cleaned out properly, so that the rem- 
nants of garbage permit the complete development of the fly in them. 



71 

If garbage were collected thoroughly but once a week, the house fly, 
which requires at least ten days to complete its do at, would not 

mature in it. But the unsatisfactory receptacles used and the incomplete 
removal of their contents perpetuate the nuisance. 

On dumping grounds I assume that many eggs, larvse and pupae of 
flies are deposited in the material brought there, and the development 
continues to the end. The public refuses to sort its refuse properly, 
as directed by the city authorities, and as a result many things are 
thrown upon dumping grounds which should have been incinerated by 
the individual householders. 

In all the difficulties surrounding the public effort to keep a city 
clean the individual households are largely to blame. Neatness and 
cleanliness must begin at home, and no amount of effort and expendi- 
ture on the part of the city government can overcome family inertia. 
Moreover, the filth accumulating in a neighbor's back yard or cellar 
injures the entire neighborhood, for the flies soon migrate from their 
breeding grounds. For these they have no more use until they are ready 
to deposit a batch of eggs. 

The campaign against the house fly and other flies with similar habits 
is a campaign for general cleanliness and neatness, besides being a cam- 
paign against a troublesome pest. Like most movements directed in the 
interest of the public health, it broadens out from its original narrow 
intent. The war against human tuberculosis has become a movement 
for more normal, hygienic living in all details of our every-day existence. 
The fight against bovine tuberculosis has taught us to value above all 
a clean milk. The campaign against malaria, has broadened into one 
against the mosquito, and will eventually extend to a general movement 
for the reclamation and utilization of the valuable lands now useless 
as swamps and marshes. In some other countries the preparation to 
successfully meet the plague has called attention to the enormous aggre- 
gate losses due to rats. It has already demonstrated the need of a better 
construction of sewers in many places, and has re-emphasized the flimsi- 
ness of wood as a building material. Not that all these needful improve- 
ments and reforms were not recognized long ago by sanitarians. They 
now serve as great public lessons and demonstrations, and stimulate the 
people first to reflect and then to act. It needs two parties to all re- 
forms, — the one who discovers the need for it, and the people to respond. 
The first is powerless without the second. 

There are many things we # still need to know about the house fly. but 
we need not wait for these to begin active hostilities. 



72 



OPHTHALMIA NEONATORUM: PREVENTIVE TREATMENT, 
SUGGESTIONS AND TREATMENT OF THE DISEASE. 1 



Ophthalmia neonatorum is an inflammation of the eyes of the new- 
born, which is usually due to infection by a specific organism. If not 
properly treated, blindness is a very common result. A large proportion 
of the blind babies owe their loss of sight to this cause. Blindness rarely 
occurs if the disease is properly treated from the beginning. The possi- 
bility of any baby becoming infected at the time of confinement should 
be constantly borne in mind, and it is desirable to carry out a routine 
preventive treatment in every case. 

Preventive Treatment. 

1. After washing the lids and adjacent tissues, drop into the eye of 
every new-born babe a few drops of a 25 per cent, solution of argyrol, 
or a 5 per cent, solution of protargol. 

2. It is not necessary to wash the solution from the eyes, as it is prac- 
tically non-irritating. 

3. Care should be taken that the end of the dropper does not touch 
the eye-ball, and that the finger-nails do not come in contact with the 
cornea. 

4. The solution of argyrol or protargol should be freshly prepared 
for each confinement case. 

Suggestions. 

1. Before leaving a confinement case, the physician should instruct 
the nurse, or, if a nurse is not employed, the most intelligent member 
of the family, to notify the doctor at once if the eyes become inflamed 
and discharge matter. He should also call attention to Section 49 of 
Chapter 75 of the Eevised Massachusetts Laws. 2 

2. When possible, these cases should be placed in the hands of an 
oculist. It is extremely desirable that all cases met with among the 
poorer classes be transferred at once to the Massachusetts Charitable 
Eye and Ear Infirmary, or some similar institution in the city where they 
occur. This is advisable, not only for the good of the child, but for the 
safety of other members of the family as well: for the fact must not 

1 Prepared by the committee appointed by the Massachusetts Medical Society "To consider 
what measures should be taken by the society to prevent the occurrence and secure the prompt and 
effective treatment of ophthalmia neonatorum." 

2 See page 74. 



73 

be lost sight of that the disease is very contagious, and that if 

of an adult or older child become infected it means an inflammation of 

even greater seriousness than when present in the eye of the new- 1 

babe. 

3. If circumstances make it necessary that the child be treated at 
home, the serious and infectious nature of the disease should be im- 
pressed upon the family. The baby should be separated from the other 
children. Caution should be given to those having the care of the child 
that their hands should be frequently washed and not brought in contact 
with their own eyes. All bits of cotton used about the eye should be 
burned. Towels and all that may come in contact with the discharge 
should be carefully separated and thoroughly boiled. 

•4. The following treatment should be begun at once : — 

Treatment. 

Wash the eyes every forty minutes with a 3 per cent, boric acid solu- 
tion. This requires the services of two intelligent persons, preferably 
nurses, one for day and the other for night duty. They should be care- 
fully instructed that in cleansing the eyes the inner angle and edges of 
the lids, which are usually tightly shut, should be freed from discharge 
by means of a bit of absorbent cotton wet with the solution. If the lids 
are then separated, most of the retained secretion will escape, and what 
remains can easily be dislodged by taking another bit of cotton, thor- 
oughly saturated with the solution, holding it an inch or two above the 
eyes, and then by pressure causing a stream to flow gently into the con- 
junctival sac. The lids should be dried after each washing, and four 
or five times a day it is well to apply a little simple ointment to their 
edges. Nurses or attendants doing this work should have their finger- 
nails trimmed as short as possible, for if a slight abrasion of the cornea 
be made in the process of washing the eyes or separating the lids, it 
will be quickly followed by infection and ulceration. The danger of 
the baby scratching the cornea with its finger-nails should also be pre- 
vented by confining the hands. 

Next in importance to cleanliness is the use of some silver salt. A 
25 per cent, solution of argyrol or a 5 per cent, solution of protargol 
may be used freely every four hours, the eyes to be first freed from secre- 
tion. In applying the remedy, the child should be placed flat on the 
back, and the head so held that the solution will not quickly escape from 
the eyes. The lids being separated with the thumb and finger, a few 
drops should be instilled with an eye-dropper. Careful instructions 
should be given, however, that the end of the dropper be not brought in 
contact with the cornea, or the instillation made with too great force. 



74 

This treatment, — frequent cleaning of the eyes, and the use of argyrol 
or protargol, — if it can be thoroughly and systematically carried out, 
will, with rare exceptions, insure a perfect recovery. 

Chapter 75, Eevised Massachusetts Laws. 

Section 49. . . . Should one or both eyes of an infant become inflamed, 
swollen and red, and show an unnatural discharge at any time within two 
weeks after its birth, it shall be the duty of the nurse, relative or other attend- 
ant having charge of such infant to report in "writing within six hours there- 
after, to the board of health of the city or town in which the parents of the 
infant reside, the fact that such inflammation, swelling and redness of the 
eyes and unnatural discharge exist. On receipt of such report, or of notice 
of the same symptoms given by a physician as provided by the following sec- 
tion, the board of health shall take such immediate action as it may deem 
necessary in order that blindness may be prevented. Whoever violates the 
provisions of this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one 
hundred dollars. 

Section 50. If a physician knows that . . . one or both eyes of an infant 
whom or whose mother he is called to visit become inflamed, swollen and red, 
and show an unnatural discharge within two weeks after the birth of such 
infant, he shall immediately give notice thereof in writing over his own signa- 
ture to the selectmen or board of health of the town; and if he refuses or 
neglects to give such notice, he shall forfeit not less than fifty nor more than 
two hundred dollars for each offence. 



THE SUPERVISION OP WATER COMPANIES BY THE STATE 
BOARD OF HEALTH. 



Chapter 319, Acts of 1909. 
An Act to provide for the supervision of water companies by the state 

board of health. 
Be it enacted, etc., as folloivs: 

Section 1. Upon complaint in writing relative to the service furnished in 
any city or town, or the charges therefor, made by any company engaged in 
the business of supplying water to such city or town or to the inhabitants 
thereof, signed by the mayor of the city or the selectmen of the toAvn, or by 
fifty customers of the company, and filed in the office of the state board of 
health, said board shall notify the company by leaving at its office or place of 
business in such city or town a copy of the complaint, and may thereupon, 
after notice, give a public hearing to the complainant or complainants and 
to the company, and shall require the company to furnish such information in 
its possession as may be necessary to determine the matters involved in the 



75 

complaint, and after the hearing may make such recommendations concerning 
the reduction, modification or continuation of such charges fo . or 

concerning improvements in the quality of the service or extensions of the 
same, or concerning other matters in the premises, as the board shall deem 
just and proper. Any such recommendations shall be transmitted in writing 
by the board to the company complained of, and a report of the proceedings 
and of the result thereof shall be included in the annual report of the board, 
together with a statement of the action, if any, taken by the company upon 
the recommendation. 

Section 2. This act shall take effect upon its passage. [Approved April 
26, 1909. 

AMENDMENT OF LAW RELATIVE TO THE SALE OF 

COCAINE. 



Chapter 375, Acts of 1909. 
An Act relative to the sale oe cocaine. 

Be it enacted, etc., as follows: 

Section 1. Section two of chapter three hundred and seven of the acts 
of the year nineteen hundred and eight is hereby amended by inserting after 
the word " restaurant ", in the fifth and sixth lines, the words : — apartment 
house, dwelling house, — so as to read as follows : — Section 2. It shall be 
unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to sell, exchange, deliver, 
expose for sale, give away or have in his possession or custody with intent 
to sell, exchange, deliver or give away, in any street, way, square, park 
or other public place, or in any hotel, restaurant, apartment house, dwelling 
house, liquor saloon, barroom, public hall, place of amusement, or public 
building any cocaine or any of its salts, or any alpha or beta eucaine, or 
any of their salts, or any synthetic substitute for the aforesaid, or any 
preparation containing any of the same. 

Section 2. Section four of chapter three hundred and eighty-six of the 
acts of the year nineteen hundred and six is hereby amended by adding at 
the end thereof the words : — and shall at all times be open to inspection 
by the officers of the state board of health and by the police authorities and 
officers of cities and towns, — so as to read as follows : — Section 4. It 
shall be unlawful for any person to sell, or to expose or offer for sale, in- 
to give or exchange any cocaine or alpha or beta eucaine or any synthetic 
substitute of the aforesaid, or any preparation containing the same, or any 
salts or compounds thereof, except upon the written prescription of a 
physician, dentist or veterinary surgeon registered under the laws of the 
commonwealth; the original of which prescription shall be retained by the 
druggist filling the same and shall not again be filled, and shall at all times 
be open to inspection by the officers of the state board of health and by 
the police authorities and officers of cities and towns. [Approved Hay 11, 
1909. 



76 



PROPRIETARY PREPARATIONS ADVERTISED AS UNSAL- 
ABLE IN 1908, FROM WHICH THE PROHIBITION WAS 
AFTERWARDS REMOVED. 



Mrs. Winslow's Soothing Syrup. The Anglo-American Drug Company, 
215- 217 Fulton Street, New York City. 

Rock, Rye and Honey : the Great French Remedy. Edward Heffernan, 
sole proprietor, Lynn, Mass. 

Celerina. Rio Chemical Company, New York. 

Dr. Coderre's Infants' Syrup (Sirop des Enfants du Dr. Coderre). 



PROPRIETARY PREPARATIONS ADVERTISED AS UNSAL- 
ABLE IN APRIL, 1909. 



Stearns's Wine (Vinum Olei Morrhuae, Stearns) : Stearns's Wine of Cod 
Liver Oil with Peptonate of Iron. 1 Frederick Stearns & Co., manufacturing 
pharmacists, Detroit, U. S. A., Windsor, Ont., Can. 

A. & P. Root Beer. Prepared and put up only by the Great Atlantic and 
Pacific Tea Company, corner West and Vestry streets, New York. 



PROPRIETARY PREPARATIONS: PROHIBITION OF SALE 

REMOVED. 



The following-named preparations, as now presented to the trade, 
being no longer in conflict with the provisions of chapter 386 of the 
Acts of 1906, may be sold at retail : — 

Dr. Swett's Root Beer Extract. Prepared by the Dr. Geo. W. Swett Root 
Beer Company, corner Albany and Harvard streets, Boston. 

Bryant's Root Beer. (A root beer extract.) The Michigan Drug Com- 
pany, 26-38 Congress Street, East, Detroit, Mich. 

Rudolf's Kola Cardinette. Palisade Manufacturing Company, Yonkers, 
N. Y. 

i Prohibition of sale later removed. 






MONTHLY m BULLETIN 



OF THE 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH 



OF 



MASSACHUSETTS. 



An official publication of the State Board of Health of Massachusetts, issued monthly 
from the office of the Board, 145 State House, Boston, Mass. 



New Series. MAY, 1909. Vol. 4. No. 5. 



Entered at the Post-office at Boston, Feb. 15, 1906, as Second-class Matter. Act 

of July 16, 1894. 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. 



HENRY P. WALCOTT, M.D., Cambridge, Chairman. 



JULIAN A. MEAD, M.D., WATERTOWN. 
HIRAM F. MILLS, C.E., LAWRENCE. 
GERARD C. TOBEY, Esq., Wareham. 



JAMES W. HULL, PlTTSFIELD. 
CHARLES H. PORTER, QUINCT. 
ROBERT W. LOVETT, M.D., BOSTON. 



MARK W. RICHARDSON, M.D., Secretary. 



BOSTON: 

WRIGHT & POTTER PRINTING CO., STATE PRINTERS, 

18 Post Office Square. 

1909. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



Pagr 

Weekly returns of deaths from cities and towns of more than 10,000 population, . 79 

Weekly returns of deaths from certain infectious diseases, 84 

Weekly returns of cases of infectious diseases, 86 

Monthly report on inspection of food and drugs, 86 

Prosecutions for violations of the law relating to food and drugs 87 

List of adulterated foods, etc., for May, 1909, 88 

Inspection of dairies, 89 

Ophthalmia neonatorum and trachoma, 90 

New law relative to the appointment of inspectors and collectors of milk, . . 90 

Amendment of law for the protection of dairymen, ... .... 91 

Licensing dealers in milk, 92 

State Board of Health to investigate the slaughtering of neat cattle, sheep and 

swine 93 

Branding of carcasses, 94 

Slaughter of animals, and inspection and sale of carcasses, ..... 94 

Inspection of domestic animals, and marking of carcasses, ..... 95 
Amendments of laws relative to persons infected with diseases dangerous to the 

public health 96, 97 

Works for the treatment or purification of sewage, 98 

Dr. Davis's Anti-Headache: prohibition of sale removed, . . . . . 99 

Oscar's Sauce, as now put upon the market, properly labeled, ..... 99 

Pennsylvania's new cocaine law, .99 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CITIES AND TOWNS 
OF MORE THAN 10,000 POPULATION. 



Week ENDING May 1, 1009. 











h 


c 
a 

5 


■z 

3 

-2 


Deaths from — 


CITIES AND TOWNS. 


~£ 


M 




« 


~- 






a-d 


2j= 


~ A 


I| j 


- i 


m 


S 


-~j~ 


^ 




"3 « 


g CJ 


■:>■ 


"3 33 jr 

u— 3 


^ Z 

v — 


JS 


1 


o 
a 


5 




— 


— 


— 


— 


- 




a 


'-' 


3- 


Boston, 


624,491 


224 


51 


75 


35 


19 4 


3 


Worcester, 








136,476 


43 


6 


8 


5 


3 


_ 


_ 




Fall River, 








106,486 


30 


13 


14 


8 


2 


_ 


1 




Cambridge, 








102,112 


19 


4 


7 


3 


4 


_ 






Lowell, 








96,380 


34 


12 


12 


5 


6 


_ 


_ 




New Bedford, 








85,516 


41 


11 


5 


2 


3 - 




Lynn, . 








84,623 


20 


3 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Springfield, 








84,237 


25 


6 


5 


2 


2 - 


_ 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


30 


14 


15 


6 


4 1 2 


_ 


Somerville, 








76,049 


24 


6 


7 


4 


- 1 1 


_ 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


8 


_ 


4 


1 


3 - 


_ 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


16 


6 


10 


3 


3 - 


1 


Maiden, 








41,941 


14 


7 


6 


4 


1 


_ _ 




Chelsea, 








40,080 


5 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


_ _ 


_ 


Newton, 








39,642 


4 


3 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


1 


Salem, 








39,019 


9 


2 


1 


- 


1 


_ _ 




Haverhill, . 








38,362 


9 


1 


2 


_ 


1 


l 


_ 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


7 


3 


2 


1 


_ 


_ _ 


_ 


Everett, 








33,597 


13 


3 


2 


2 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Quincy, 








31,937 


6 


2 


2 


2 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


13 


3 


4 


1 


1 




_ 


_ 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


12 


4 


5 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


6 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


8 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


6 


1 


,1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


North Adams, 








22,150 


7 


- 


2 


- 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Northampton, 








21,075 


8 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


6 


2 


3 


- 


2 


- 


_ 


_ 


Medford, . 








20,921 


7 


1 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Beverly, 








16,386 


2 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Leominster, 








16,030 


1 


- 




- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


3 


1 




- 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


Melrose, 








15,459 


4 





1 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Revere, 








14,820 


4 


o 


1 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


1 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 




_ 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


6 


1 


4 


1 


3 


_ 




_ 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Marlborough, . 








14,456 


4 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


. 2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


1 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Clinton, 








13,105 


7 


3 


3 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


4 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Milford, . 








12,722 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Watertown , 








12,676 


1 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


2 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


1 


. _ 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


Framingham, . 








11,749 


2 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 




- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 1 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


-'1 


- 


Greenfield, 






10,140 


1 


- 




- 


- 


- 


- | 


- 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,366,746 



707 



185 



211 



96 66 



1 The populations were estimated upon the rate of growth from 1900 to 1905. Those of Taunton, 
Gloucester, North Adams and Clinton were allowed to stand as in 1905, having- shown no increase 
during the live-year period. The gain in the population of Lowell is due to the annexation of a 
part of the town of Tewksbury. The population of Lawrence by the census of 1905 was 70,050, '."'.".t. 
owing to the building of the new Wood and Arlington mills, an increase of about 8,000 is estimated 
by the Lawrence board of health, or 78,000. 



80 



Week ending May 8, 1009. 





i 


£ 


o 




Deaths 


FKOM — 




H 


a 


u 












■ ^ 


CO 






t. 1 




' u. 




•o 










■ r 




CITIES AND TOWNS. 


= .o 




£ 


_ — 


s s 




a 


"Z 






— •3 






« = 


1-5 « 







-z '■*• 






I" 3 


o — 




Co 01 


2 « 

OH 


2 


a. 


"z 


3 






at 


- 




< 


»i 


— 


r- 


a 


Boston, 


624,491 


237 


62 


91 


30 


28 


4 


1 


4 


Worcester, 








136,476 


36 


9 


7 


5 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


Fall River, 








106,486 


31 


9 


10 


2 


2 


- 


1 


_ 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


30 


3 


12 


2 


7 


- 


_ 


_ 


Lowell, 








96,380 


34 


9 


12 


8 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


21 


10 


14 


5 


3 


1 


_ 


_ 


Lynn,. 








84,623 


28 


4 


8 


- 


7 


1 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


34 


7 


13 


8 


3 


- 1 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


20 


6 


10 


7 


1 


- 


1 


Somerville, 








76,049 


18 


3 


3 


1 


1 


- I 


_ 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


12 


3 


1 


1 


- 


_ ; 


_ 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


23 


8 


11 


5 


5 


- | 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


11 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


6 


1 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39.642 


11 


1 


2 


- 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Salem, 








39,019 


20 


2 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


15 


5 


6 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, . 








34,263 


8 


■ 3 


4 


3 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Everett, .. 








33,597 


5 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


16 


6 


9 


6 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


4 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


6 


- 


3 


- 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


5 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


1 


1 


— 


- 




- 


_ 


_ 


North Adams, 








22,150 


12 


2 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


10 


4 


1 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


7 


3 


3 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Med ford, . 








20.921 


6 


1 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Beverly, . 








16,386 


5 


1 


2 


2 




- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


2 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


1 


Newhuryport, 








14,834 


4 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wohurn, . 








14,522 


5 


2 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


"" 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


6 





2 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


o 




2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


3 


o 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


1 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Mil ford, 








12.722 


3 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


3 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- I 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


1 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


F ram high am, 








11,749 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington,. 








10,520 


o 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


4 


- 






— 


— 


— 


— 


Becnpi 


tulatic 


n. 










Total of reporting towns, . 2,350,262 


726 


174 


244 


100 


78 


S 


3 6 









W 


KEK ENDING MAY 15, 


1909. 














i 


= 


w 












3 


■" 


£ 




1'KAIII 


KKOM — 




(Sen 

1 

.£ 


Q 












CITIES AND TOWNS. 


~z 


M 

= 2 




4 


> 
• 






3 C5 


z4 


— a 


« 3 . 

■2-0 =» 
S3S 

ssS 


^5 
S i 


to 


3 

O. 


c 


i 

3 

s 




c 


X 


— 




< 


— 


— 


P 




Boston, 


624,401 


214 


52 


73 


28 


22 


3 




:; 


Worcester, 








136,476 


37 


9 


7 


5 


1 




_ 




Fall River, 








106,486 


39 


12 


20 


13 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


33 


7 


14 


4 


8 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Lowell, 








96,380 


32 


13 


9 


4 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


36 


12 


13 


8 


5 




_ 


_ 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


25 


5 


2 


- 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


Springfield, 








84,237 


27 


5 


12 


5 


5 


1 


_ 


_ 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


24 


8 


15 


7 


5 




_ 


1 


Somerville, 








76,049 


21 


3 


7 


2 


3 


z 


_ 




Brockton, . 








55,039 


16 


4 


3 


- 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


Hoi yoke, . 








53,590 


24 


8 


11 


2 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Maiden, 








41,941 


6 


4 


2 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


5 


4 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Newton, 








39,642 


11 


1 


3 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Salem, 








39,019 


18 


2 


3 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


13 


2 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


5 


3 


3 


1 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Everett, 








33,597 


5 


1 


1 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Quincy, 








31,937 


7 





2 


2 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


15 


2 


3 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


7 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


4 


2 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ _ 


Brook line, . 








26,674 


9 


1 


1 


1 




_ 


_ : _ 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


11 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ _ 


North Adams, 








22,150 


7 


3 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ _ 


Northampton, 








21,075 


12 


4 


o 


1 


1 


- 


_ 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


13 


6 


5 


3 


- 


1 


- 1 


Medford, . 








20,921 


8 


2 


3 


- 


1 


_ 


_ _ 


Beverly, 








16,386 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Leominster, 








16,030 


7 


2 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ _ 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 




_ _ 


Melrose, 








15,459 


4 


1 


2 


2 


_ 


_ 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


4 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


Revere, 








14,820 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


9 


4 


4 


3 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


3 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


_ 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


3 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


2 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


Adams, 








13,685 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Clinton, 








13,105 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


7 


1 


2 


1 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


Milford, . 








12 722 


3 





2 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Watertown, 








12^676 


3 





1 


_ 


1 


_ 


- 


_ 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


4 


1 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


5 


1 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, ■ 








11,749 


2 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


4 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


3 


~ 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


— 


- 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,379,468 



748 



195 



240 



112 ! 72 



82 



Week ending Mat 22, 1909. 







= 


i 
















i 




Death 


rsoM — 








| 










CITIES AND TOWNS. 


-i 


M 




= 


> 
- 












3 = . 


- I 




r 


1~ 








— £. 




— : i 














■= "^ 


\ ° 


~ r 


o - 5 


S i 


■= 


r 


z 


T 




S. a 




= >. 


- Z. ~ 


D - 






c. 


= 




C " 


- — 


■ ^ 


p 


- — 








- 






— 






"- 


— 


O 


r-' 


~- 


Boston 


624,491 


211 


58 


74 


25 


16 


4 


2 


6 


Worcester, 








136,476 


38 


6 


6 


2 


3 


■ - 


_ 


_ 


Fall River, 








106,486 


33 


16 


12 


4 


3 


_ 


_ 


Cambridge, 








! J.112 


32 


2 


20 


6 


12 


1 


_ 


Lowell, 








96,380 


32 


4 


8 


5 


J 


_ 


_ 


New Bedford, 








85.516 


29 


13 


9 


6 


- 


_ 


_ 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


18 


5 


2 


- 


- 


1 


_ 


Springfield, 








84,237 


13 


8 


6 


3 


- 


1 


- ! 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


25 


10 


11 


5 


4 


_ 


_ _ 


Somerville, 








76,049 


15 


2 


3 


2 


- 


_ 


- - 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


11 


2 


2 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


22 


3 


11 


5 


5 


_ 


- - 


Maiden, 








41,941 


8 


3 


- 


- 


- 


_ 1 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


7 


2 


_ 


- 


- 


- - 


Newton, 








39,642 


9 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 1 


Salem, 








39.019 


6 


- 


1 


1 


_ 


— _ _ 


Haverhill, . 








38.362 


14 


4 


4 


3 


1 


- _ 


Fitchburg, . 








34.263 


7 


2 


3 


2 


- 


_ 


- 1 


Everett, . 








33,597 


8 


1 


1 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


Quincy, 








31,937 


5 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- _ 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


6 


3 


3 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


Waltham, . 








28.761 


8 





_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


15 


3 


6 


5 


1 


- 


- _ 


Brookline, . 








26.674 


5 


- 


2 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


5 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


North Adams, 








22,150 


5 


3 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ _ 


Northampton, 








21,075 


10 


3 


2 


- 


2 


_ 


_ 


Chicopee, . 








21.049 


4 


3 




1 


_ 


_ 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


4 


- 




- 


1 


_ 


_ 


Beverly, 








16,386 


8 


1 




2 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16.030 


2 


- 




1 


- 


_ 


_ _ 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


3 


1 












Melrose, 








15,459 


1 







- 


1 


- 


_ 


Nervburyport, 








14.834 


8 


- 




1 


2 


- 


- _ 


Revere, 








14.820 


4 


_ 




- 


- 


_ 


_ 


Westfield, . 








14.750 


5 


1 




- 


1 


_ _ 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


7 


1 




1 


- 


_ 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 




- 


- 


_ 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


1 


1 








_ 


Attleborough, 








13.913 


2 











_ _ _ 


Adams, 








13.685 


1 


1 




1 


_ 


_ - 


Clinton, 








13.105 


4 







- 


I 


_ 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


7 


1 




_ 


2 


1 - 


Milford, . 








12.722 


_ 


_ 




— 




_ 


_ 


Watertown, 








12,676 


2 







1 




_ 


_ 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 




_ 


_ 


_ 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


6 


4 




- 


- 


_ _ 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


7 


2 




- 


_ 


_ 


Framingham, 








11,749 


6 


3 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Webster, . 








11,109 




- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Arlington, . 








10,520 





- 


- 


- 


*~ 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


4 


"1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



! 

2,366,746 683 177 213 j 88 61 7 



83 



Week ending Mav 29, 19"9. 



CITIES AND TOWNS. 



Boston, 

Worcester, 

Fall River, 

Cambridge, 

Lowell, 

New Bedford, 

Lynn , 

Springfield, 

Lawrence, 

Somerville, 

Brockton, . 

Holyoke, . 

Maiden, 

Chelsea, 

Newton, 

Salem, 

Haverhill, 

Fitchburg, 

Everett, 

Quincy, 

Taunton, . 

Waltham, . 

Pittsfield, . 

Brookline, . 

Gloucester, 

North Adams, 

Northampton, 

Chicopee, . 

Medford, . 

Beverly, 

Leominster, 

Hyde Park, 

Melrose, 

Newburyport, 

Revere, 

Westfield, . 

Woburn, . 

Peabody, . 

Marlborough, 

Attleborough, 

Adams, 

Clinton, 

Gardner, 

Milford, . 

Watertown, 

Plymouth, 

Southbridge, 

Weymouth, 

Framingham, 

Wakefield, 

Webster, . 

Arlington, 

Greenfield, 



Deaths raox- 



624 
136 
106 
102 
96 
85 
84 
84 
78 
76 
55 
53 
41 
40 
39 
39 
38 
34 
33 
31 
30 
28 
27 

26 
26 
22 
21 
21 
20 
16 
16 
15 
15 
14 
14 
14 
14 
14 
14, 
13, 
13 
13, 
13 
12. 
12 
12. 
11 
11. 
11 
11, 
11 
10 
10 



491 
,476 
,486 

,112 
,380 

,516 
,623 

,237 
,000 
,049 
,039 
.590 
•41 
,080 
642 
,019 
,362 
263 
,597 
,937 
967 
761 
,932 
'674 
,011 
,150 
,075 
,049 
,921 
,386 
,030 
609 
45V) 
,834 
,820 
,750 
522 
,512 
456 
913 
685 
105 
066 
722 
676 
514 
S4S 
798 
749 
124 
109 
,520 
140 



206 

38 

21 

32 

38 

24 

22 

18 

29 

25 

11 

18 

13 

9 

14 

16 

12 

12 

8 

7 

7 

9 

3 

8 

8 

7 

5 

5 

2 

7 

4 

3 

8 

4 

7 

7 



38 


61 


6 


10 


7 


8 


£ 


18 


9 


11 


7 


1 


6 



15 23 

3 2 

7 7 

4 4 

5 - 



- 2 



1 
1 
1 
1 

2 



1 1 

2 2 
4 3 

3 1 

2 1 



4 





1 


_ 


1 


2 


- 


1 


- 


1 


5 


1 


1 


- 


- 


2 





1 


1 


- 


3 

4 


1 


- 


- 




3 


1 








3 




- 




- 



Becapitul 



Total of reporting towns 



2,321,245 701 255 205 73 H 



84 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CERTAIN INFECTIOUS 

DISEASES. 



Deaths from Infectious Diseases not specifically mentioned in 
above Tables during the Weeks of May 1, 8, 15, 22 and 29, 
1909. 





Place. 


Week ending — 


DISEASE. 
















May 1. 


May 8. 


May 15. 


May 22. 


May 29. 


Cerebrospinal meningitis, 


Boston, 


1 


_ 


_ 




1 




Lowell, 


- 


- 


- 




- 




Northampton, 


- 


1 


- 




- 




Soinerville, 


1 


_ 


2 




_ 


Scarlet fever, .... 


Boston, 


3 


2 


3 




2 




Brockton, . 


- 


- 


1 




- 




Lynn, . 


- 


- 


- 




- 




Lowell, 


- 


1 


- 




- 




Medford, 


- 


- 


2 




- 




Milford, . 


- 


- 


- 




1 




New Bedford, 


- 


1 


- 




- 




Springfield, 


- 


- 


- 




- 




Taunton, 


- 


- 


- 




1 




Waltham, . 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 




Worcester, . 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Whooping cough, 


Boston, 


1 
1 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 




Brookline, . 


- 


- 


- 


- 


1 




Chicopee, . 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 




Clinton, 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 




Everett, 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 




Haverhill, . 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 




Lynn, . 


- 


- 


- 


- 


1 




Maiden, 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 




New Bedford, 


- 


1 


- 


- 


1 




North Adams, 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 




Southbridge, 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 




Springfield, 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 




Taunton. 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 




Westfield, . 


- 


- 


- 


- 


2 




Weymouth, 


~ 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Erysipelas, .... 


Boston, 


1 


4 


3 


2 


_ 




Brockton, . 


- 


- 


- 


- 


1 




Cambridge, 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 




Fitohburg, . 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 




Lawrence, . 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 




New Bedford, 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 




Springfield, 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 




waltham, . 


1 


- 




- 


- 




Worcester, . 




- 


1 


_ 





So 





Place. 


Wkkk BSDma — 


DISEASE. 


May 1. 


May 8. 


May 10 


May 22. 


May 29. 


Tuberculosis, other than pulmo- 
nary. 


Boston, 
Cambridge, 
Holyoke, 
Lawrence, . 
Newburyport, 
Pittsfield, . 
Springfield, 
Taunton, 
Westfield, . 


3 


4 

1 

2 


4 
2 
1 

1 


4 
1 

1 
2 
1 

1 


9 
2 

1 


Tubercular meningitis, 


Lynn, . 
Salem, 


- 


1 


- 


1 


Influenza, ..... 


Boston, 
Cambridge, 


1 


1 


- 


1 

1 



WEEKLY RETURNS OP CASES OP INFECTIOUS DISEASES. 



Cases of Infectious Diseases reported during the Weeks of 
Mat 1, 8, 15, 22 and 29, 1909. 

[Under the provisions of section 52 of chapter 75 of the Revised Laws.] 



Week ending — 



May 1. 



May S. 



May 15. 



May 22. 



May 29. 



Diphtheria, 

Measles, .... 

Scarlet fever, 

Typhoid fever, . 

Tuberculosis, pulmonary, 

Cerebro-spinal meningitis, 

Whooping cough, 

Varicella, . 

Erysipelas, 

Mumps, 

Ophthalmia neonatorum, 

Tuberculosis other than pulmonary, 

Smallpox, . 

Leprosy, 

Tuberculosis, meningitis, 



106 

536 

162 

35 

186 

3 

48 

46 

1 

2 

1 

4 



113 

468 

134 

35 

196 

1 

33 

47 



103 

580 

155 

18 

167 

4 

45 

53 



127 

458 

139 

24 

213 

4 

29 

44 



118 

395 

135 

27 

141 

3 

17 

45 



86 



MONTHLY REPORT ON INSPECTION OF FOOD AND DRUGS. 



The following summary presents the results of the examination of food 
and drugs made by the State Board of Health during the month of 
May, 1909: — 



Articles kxaminkd. 


Number 
found 

to be of 
Good 

Quality. 


Number 

adulterated 

or varying 

from the 

Legal 
Standard. 


Total. 


Akticlks kxaminkd. 


Number 
found 

to be of 
Good 

Quality. 


Number 
adulterated 
or varying 

from the 
Legal 

Standard. 


Total. 


Beer, 
Butter, . 

Cheese, . 
Cocoa, . 
Coffee extract, 
Condensed milk, . 
Cream, . 

Cream of tartar, . 
Drugs, . 

Extract of lemon, 
Grape juice, . 
Jams and jellies, . 
Lard, 

Maple sugar, 
Maple syrup, 
Meat products : — 

Pigs feet, . 

Pressed beef, 


1 

3 
1 
2 
1 
1 

13 
1 

61 
1 
2 
2 
1 
3 
1 

1 

1 


5 

IS 


1 
8 
1 
2 
1 
1 

13 
1 

76 
1 
2 
2 
1 
3 
1 

1 
1 


Meat products — 
Con. 

Sausages, . 

Sausage meat, . 
Milk, . 
Olive oil, 
Pickles, 

Proprietary foods, 
Sardine paste, 
Shrimp paste, 
Shrimp, 
Lobster, 

Salad dressing, . 
Spices, . 
Syrup, . 
Table sauce, 
Vinegar, 

Total, . 


11 

1 

431 

19 
2 
1 

1 
1 
1 
1 
4 
1 
2 

23 


2 

91 

7 
1 
2 
1 

10 


13 

1 

522 

26 
3 
3 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
4 
1 
2 

33 


595 


134 


729 



The samples of drugs found to be adulterated were : olive oil, expressed 
oil of almond, spirit of peppermint, mercurial ointment, iodine oint- 
ment and several proprietary medicines. 

The cities and towns in which samples were collected were : Adams, 
Amesbur} r , Attleborough, Ayer, Boston, Braintree, Brockton, Brookline, 
Chicopee, Danvers, Dedham, Everett, Fitchburg, Holyoke, Ipswich, 
Lawrence, Littleton, Lowell, Lynn, Maiden, Milford, New Bedford, 
Newburyport, North Adams, Northampton, Palmer, Peabody, Pittsfield, 
Quincy, Beading, Salem, South Framingham, Somerville, Springfield, 
Stoneham, Taunton, Ware, Westfield, Westminster and Worcester. 



87 



PROSECUTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW RELATING 
TO FOOD AND DRUGS. 



Thirty-two convictions were secured during the month of May, 1909, 

for selling adulterated food and drugs, as follows : — 



No. 


Name of Defendant. 


Place. 


Character of Article sold. 


1 


George N. Pilalis, 


Springfield, . 


Maple sugar. 


2 


Chas. L. Davis, .... 


Newburyport, 


Mercurial ointment (53.2 
percent. TJ. S. P). 


3 


John H. C. Pratt, 


Everett, * . 


Mercurial ointment (18.2 
percent. U. S. P.). 


4 


Fred. A. Spencer, 


Everett, 


Mercurial ointment. 1 


5 


Munroe B. Chesley, 


Amesbury, 


Milk (skimmed) . 


6 


Munroe B. Chesley, 


Amesbury, 


Milk (watered). 


7 


William E. Dailey, . 


South Braintree, . 


Milk (total solids, 9.94) . 


8 


George H. Gould, 


Taunton, 


Milk (total solids, 10.71; 
watered) . 


9 


John Larnard, .... 


Amesbury, 


Milk. 


10 


John C. Monyihan, 


Newburyport, 


Milk (total solids, 10.66). 


11 


John C. Monyihan, 


Newburyport, 


Milk (watered) . 


12 


Samuel Mills, .... 


Westminster, 


Milk (total solids, 11.14). 


13 


Loues Reynolds, .... 


Westminster, 


Milk (total solids, 11.46). 


14 


George Yapp, .... 


Littleton, 


Milk (total solids, 11.02). 


15 


Peter Patropoulos, 


Maiden, 


Olive oil (contained 50 per 
cent, cotton-seed oil) . 


16 


Joseph Russo, .... 


Maiden, 


Olive oil (cotton-seed oil) . 


17 


Constantino Spiropoulos, 


Boston, . 


Olive oil. 


18 


Constantino Spiropoulos, 


Boston, . 


Olive oil. 


19 


Constantino Spiropoulos, 


Boston, . 


Olive oil. 


20 


Albert H. Dailey, 


Springfield, . 


Renovated butter. 


21 


Herman Isenberg, 


Springfield, . 


Shrimp. 2 


22 


Herman Isenberg, 


Springfield, . 


Tomato sausage. 5 


23 


Wm. W. Babcock, 


Springfield, . 


Vinegar. 


24 


John Bolan, .... 


Springfield, . 


Vinegar. 


25 


William H. Cleary, 


Springfield, . 


Vinegar. 


26 


Stephen J. Collins, 


Springfield, . 


Vinegar. 


27 


Herman J. Haring, 


Springfield, . 


Vinegar. 


28 


Edward S. Hanks, 


West Springfield, . 


Vinegar. 


29 


Alexander Pezzini, 


West Springfield, . 


Vinegar. 


30 


Clarence D. Robinson, 


Springfield, . 


Vinegar. 


31 


Wm. 0. Sheldon, 


Springfield, . 


Vinegar. 


32 


Sylvester L. Traver, . 


Springfield, . 


Vinegar. 



i Appealed. 

Fines imposed, $489. 



" Contained a preservative. 



88 



I* 
<l 

ft 
O 
ft 

6 

En 
ft 

w 

ft 

O 
O 

ft 

R 
ft 
P 
ft 

n 
o 
p 

;* 
p 
ft 
ft 
ft 
o 
ft 
ft 



ft 
o 

R 
ft 
En 
< 
ft 
ft 
Eh 
P 
P 
P 
<l 

ft 
O 

Eh 
W 



© u 

£ © 

• • ft S 

© ©,_. •— i 

rt "S 2 2 



h 




t- 


- 




— 


t. 


u 









-.. 


© 


a> 


V 


© 




-.. 


























sS 


a 


SB 


eg 


gg 


- 




gg 






£ Ss £ fe 5s 


^ 


& Is 


o 




•tf 


t; 


t3'3 , a 


iq 


T! 


"T 


u 




o 


0) 


© 


a> 


a) 


-.. 


© 


n 






















ft 


M 


TT 














>o 




rt 


S 


" 


« 


* 


gg 


< 


- 


vl 


r 



fl OOSOCili* 



a a c a s fl s 



o o 

B E 



o o ...s 

ED 



O © 



ft.3 
•-(3 

"3 S 
•S c 



O O 

© © 

© © 



ft,i5 W B B - 
5T m »»H -^ -rH •!-! 



i^ *T3 r^ 
0J © o 

© © © 

WWW 



r^ r^ r^ 
© © © 

c fl a 



ft o a c 
g c o o 



c e a 
o o o 



5 J+jxJJuuJpO.* 

££c a bbbbbbbb©^ 
e a © © ©a®©©©©©^;; 
© © « o ©©ouo©©©ga 

tJ'C t< fr-i ©o©©©©©© 

©©© © D.aa&D.s.Bi ft'- n 
a a to co ^ortctDnw"^ ** 

.r, .« fc- rn odo'HdrioJRS 

"S'Stt O rH rH rH rH rH rH 1-H <-< . . 

CS C! © *"• © «-»■-« r— i r- •— f— i ■— . I— I •-" O 'B 

■"■wa r Oa r aoooooco05'7< 
aa > "©"-© al t" l/:t ' :cc «: ! ' 3ai S 

ff) © C3 •*-* C3 -*-* «— ' »— i i— i »— H •— »— • •— ' *"-• — 

© © § " o^ooooo'oooo ft 
PhPhO O HBHHHBhhH 



<j 


*g- 


JC 


B w 
• • • e3 eS 


p 


tH Q, 

PC 


.. 


. -03 


bD 


• ^Sfe 


S 


ij o 


r3 


E.rt w 



'w 



-Hi 03 
©m S2 S 

© rf C_i -B S 

B o 1 ^ M® 

O O oj > >T3 5 ji" 
B B ^"-"2 P.™ w 

SSgoOoggg 
O O "T o o g .2 

ojcc o S S~5 

.-. — o © © c ^_, 

oo 5.2.2 §§| 

^3 ^3 fn P=t t=H 02 a.rr; 

ooooooga 

OOOOOOOffl 



O o 



Ki a .S 





















* 








-/ 


rr 








- 




gg 


gg 


7. 


s 


- 










s^ 


+J 










c3i 

ft B 


2 




3 

-3 


>H r- 

B H 


o 


.« © 

pu a 


r« 

IS 


t-l 


. 


<- 






a 




© 


p 




2£ 

6C © 




















n 


IH 






u 


0j 








JS 


— 


/; 


B 


SO 


B 



tj 


Ph 


w 


>-. 

Eh 

tH 

© 


S 


4o 


p 


pq 


d 


Ph 


DO 

i. 


© 


9 

C 


B 


> 


gg 


s 




O 

I— 


© — 

(JO 


< 



ooooooo^. 

© © © 0? © © 33 



£1 



>>>>>>> a o^al^^^^^--- 



ococooocS 



s rissssiiSriii 



PU &. Ph Pl, Ph 



= 3- a~ 



"jint-OHON?! <c eoiot-csccccc;'* - —! 
c;o;o;3: ct^o cc t— t- i— t- •* n r: tc t- 

o^ c; c; Ci cr. c; c. c; c; cv c. w. '. ci h ai h c 



89 



INSPECTION OF DAIRIES. 



During the month of May, 1909, 108 dairies were examined in the 
following places : — 



Number 
examined. 



Number found 

to present 

no Objectionable 

Features. 


Per Cent. 


2 
7 


66.67 
25.93 


3 

1 
16 


13.64 
20.00 
35.56 



Number to 

which Letters 

were sent. 



Granby, 

Second inspection, 
Holyoke, 

Second inspection, 
Northampton, 

Second inspection, 
Southampton, 
South Had ley, 

Second inspection, 



1 

3 

27 

5 
22 

5 
45 



1 

1 

20 

5 
19 

4 
29 



100.00 
33.33 
74.07 

100.00 
86.36 
80.00 
64.44 



Total number of dairies examined, 108 

Number found to be free from objectionable conditions, 29 

Number to which letters were sent, 79 

Total number of conditions to which attention was called, 229 

Percentage of dairies which passed inspection, 26.85 

The names of the owners of dairies found to be worthy of commenda- 
tion follow : — 

Holyolee. 

Goodyear, George L. 1 Kohler, Louis C. Shea, Patrick F. 2 

Humeston, Thomas R. 2 Kurtz, Adam Whiting, William * 

Jenks, William W. 2 Shauer, David C. 2 Wright, A. E. 



Brass, R. T. 



Southampton. 

Parsons, W. A. 



Searles, O. M. 



Boynton, C. S. 1 
Brockway, Horace T. 1 
Day, I. N. 2 
Fillion, Joseph ! 
Fitzgerald, John 2 
Gagne, A. 1 



South Hadley. 

Griffin, James 2 
Judd, C. A. 2 
Judd, W. S. & Son 2 
LeGrand, Frank 2 
Long, P. J. 2 
Lyman, Eugene H. 2 



Lyman, John E. 2 
Smith, Mrs. G. C. 
South Hadley Town Farm 
Strong, A. 2 
Thompson, A. J. 2 



i Reported favorably on first inspection as well. 



Second inspection. 



90 



OPHTHALMIA NEONATORUM AND TRACHOMA. 



At a meeting of the State Board of Health, held on May 6, 1909, 
it was voted that ophthalmia neonatorum and trachoma be declared dis- 
eases dangerous to the public health, and therefore notifiable under 
sections 49 and 50 of chapter 75 of the Eevised Laws. 



NEW LAW RELATIVE TO THE APPOINTMENT OF INSPEC- 
TORS AND COLLECTORS OF MILK. 



Acts of 1909, Chapter 405. 
An Act to provide for the appointment of inspectors and collectors 

of milk by boards of health. 
Be it enacted, etc., as follows: 

Section 1. Tlie boards of health of cities shall, and boards of health of 
towns or the selectmen acting as such boards, may, appoint one or more 
inspectors of milk for their respective cities and towns. In cities such in- 
spectors, after appointment, may be removed from office in accordance with 
the provisions of chapter three hundred and fourteen of the acts of the 
year nineteen hundred and four; in towns they may be removed at any time 
by the appointing board. Such inspectors shall have the powers and per- 
form the duties now conferred and imposed by law upon the inspectors of 
milk, but they shall be under the control of the boards of health appointing 
them, and shall perform such other duties as the said boards may designate. 
Their compensation shall be determined by tbe boards of health in cities, 
and by the selectmen in towns appointing them. 

Section 2. The collectors of milk provided for by section fifty-two of 
chapter fifty-six of the Revised Laws shall hereafter be appointed by the 
board of health, or by the selectmen acting as such a board, in each city 
or town, and the said boards may also designate and employ any member 
of the board or any agent or employee thereof, to act as a collector of milk, 
and the collectors of milk so appointed or designated shall have the powers 
and perform the duties conferred or imposed by law upon collectors of milk. 

Section 3. Section fifty-three of said chapter which provides for the 
licensing of vendors of milk in vehicles is hereby amended by adding at 
the end thereof the following: — If the applicant for a license fails to com- 
ply with any regulation established by the board of health in the city or 
town where the application is made, a license may be refused until he has 
complied with such regulation; and a license granted under this section may 



91 

be revoked at any time for failure to comply with any such regulation. If 
a license is refused or revoked under this provision, an appeal may be taken 
to the state board of health, whose decision shall be final and eonelfU 

Section 4. So much of sections fifty-one and fifty-two of said chapter 
fifty-six as is inconsistent herewith is hereby repealed. 

Section 5. This act shall take effect upon its passage; but inspectors 
and collectors of milk in office at the time of the passage of this act shall 
continue in office until their successors are appointed hereunder. [Approved 
May 19, 1909. 



AMENDMENT OF LAW FOR THE PROTECTION OF DAIRY- 
MEN. 



Acts of 1909, Chapter 425. 
An Act to provide further for the protection of dairymen. 
Be it enacted, etc., as follows: 

Section 1. Chapter two hundred and two of the acts of the year nine- 
teen hundred and one is hereby amended by striking out section four and 
inserting in place thereof the following : — Section 4. No person shall, 
either by himself or in the employ of any other person, firm or corporation, 
manipulate the Babcock test, or any other test, whether mechanical or 
chemical, for the purpose of measuring the butter fat contained in milk 
or cream as a basis for determining the value of such milk or cream, or of 
butter or cheese made from the same, without first obtaining a certificate 
from the director of the Massachusetts agricultural experiment station that 
he or she is competent to perform such work. Rules governing applications 
for such certificates and the granting of the. same shall be established by 
the said director. The fee for issuing the said certificate shall in no case 
exceed two dollars, shall be paid by the applicant to the said director, and 
shall be used in meeting the expenses incurred under this act. If the duly 
authorized inspector finds an operator who, after receiving his certificate 
of competency, is not, in the judgment of the inspector, correctly manip- 
ulating the Babcock or other test used as a basis for determining the value 
of milk and cream, or who is using dirty, untested or otherwise unsatis- 
factory glassware, he shall immediately report the case in writing to the 
director of the station. The director shall at once notify said operator in 
writing and give him not less than thirty days to make the necessary im- 
provements. At the expiration of that time the director may order a second 
inspection, the cost of which shall be borne by the operator or by the per- 
son, firm or corporation employing him, and if the required improvement 
has not been made, the director is empowered to notify in writing said op- 
erator, or the person, firm or corporation employing him, that his certificate 



92 

of competency is revoked. In case of any subsequent violation the said 
director may revoke the certificate of competency without giving the notice 
aforesaid. 

Section 2. This act shall take effect upon its passage. [Approved May 
21, 1909. 

LICENSING DEALERS IN MILK. 



Acts of 1909, Chapter 443.' 
An Act relative to licensing dealers in milk. 
Be it enacted, etc., as follows: 

Section 1. No person, partnership or corporation, except a producer 
selling milk to other than consumers, or not to exceed twenty quarts per 
day to consumers, shall deliver, exchange, expose for sale or sell or have 
in his custody or possession with the intent to deliver, exchange, expose 
for sale or sell any milk, skimmed milk or cream in any city or town in 
which an inspector of milk is appointed, without obtaining from the in- 
spector of milk of such city or town a license. The license shall contain 
the number thereof, the name, place of business, residence, number of car- 
riages or other vehicles used by the licensee and the name of every driver 
or other person employed by him in carrying or selling milk. A license 
issued to a partnership or corporation shall be issued in the business name 
of said partnership or corporation and it shall contain the names in full 
of the partners and managers of said partnership or officers of said cor- 
poration. The license shall, for the purposes of this chapter, be conclusive 
evidence of ownership and shall not be sold, assigned or transferred. Who- 
ever in such cities or towns engages himself or by his servant or agent in 
the business of selling milk, «kimmed milk or cream from any carriage or 
other vehicle shall display conspicuously on the outer side of all carriages 
or other vehicles so used, the license number in figures not less than one 
and one half inches in height and the name and place of business of the 
licensee in gothic letters not less than one and one half inches in height. 
"Whoever in such cities or towns engages himself or by his servant or agent 
in the business of selling milk, skimmed milk or cream in a store, booth, 
stand, or market place shall have his license conspicuously posted in such 
store, booth, stand or market place. 

Section 2. Whoever, without being licensed in accordance with the pre- 
ceding section, delivers, exchanges, exposes for sale or sells milk, skimmed 
milk or cream, or has it in his custody or possession with intent to deliver, 
exchange, expose for sale or sell, and whoever violates any of the provisions 
of the preceding section shall for a first offence be punished by a fine of 
not less than ten dollars nor more than one hundred dollars, for a second 
offence by a fine of not less than fifty dollars nor more than three hundi-ed 



93 

dollars and for a subsequent offence by a fine of fifty dollars and by im- 
prisonment for not less than thirty nor more than sixty is 

Section 3. Inspectors of milk in any city or town may, for the purposes 
mentioned in the preceding sections, grant licenses, subject to the regulations 
established by the board of health of such city or town, to suitable persons, 
and shall receive for each license so granted a fee of fifty cents for the use 
of such city or town, and all license fees collected by him shall be paid over 
monthly to the city or town treasurer. Such licenses shall remain in force 
until the first day of June next following, unless previous to that time said 
license is suspended or revoked. Said inspector of milk may declare any 
license granted by him suspended or forfeited upon a conviction of the 
licensee in any court of this commonwealth, for violation of the terms of 
his license. 

Section 4. If the applicant for a license fails to comply with any regu- 
lation established by the board of health in the city or town where the appli- 
cation is made, a license may be refused until he has complied with such 
regulation; and a license granted under the provisions of this act may be 
revoked at any time for failure to comply with any such regulation as afore- 
said. If a license is refused or revoked under this provision, an appeal 
may be taken to the state board of health, whose decision shall be final and 
conclusive. 

Section 5. Sections fifty-three and fifty-four of chapter fifty-six of the 
Revised Laws are hereby repealed, but this repeal shall not affect any pend- 
ing suit or other proceeding. [Approved May 24, 1909. 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH TO INVESTIGATE THE SLAUGH- 
TERING OP NEAT CATTLE, SHEEP AND SWINE. 



Acts of 1909, Chapter 118. 

Resolve to authorize the state board of health to investigate the 
slaughtering op neat cattle, sheep and swine. 
Resolved, That the state board of health is hereby authorized and directed 
to investigate the methods and circumstances of the slaughtering of neat 
cattle, sheep and swine and the inspection of the products thereof, and the 
operation of chapter five hundred and thirty-seven of the acts of the year 
nineteen hundred and seven and the acts in amendment thereof and in addition 
thereto, and to report the result of its investigation to the general court on or 
before January fifteenth next, with such recommendations as the board may 
deem advisable. [Approved June 3, 1909. 



94 



BRANDING OF CARCASSES. 



Acts of 1909, Chapter 471. 
An Act relative to the stamping and branding op the carcasses op 

certain domestic animals. 
Be it enacted, etc., as follows: 

Section one hundred and three of chapter seventy-five of the Revised Laws, 
as set forth in chapter two hundred and twenty of the acts of the year 
nineteen hundred and three, is hereby amended by striking out the word 
"is", in the third line, and inserting in place thereof the word: — are, — 
and by striking out the words " in force on the fifteenth day of June in the 
year nineteen hundred and one ", in the sixth and seventh lines, — so as to 
read as follows : — Section 103. In a slaughtering establishment wherein 
inspection and branding are not carried on under the rules and regulations 
for the inspection of live stock and other products, established by the 
United States department of agriculture in accordance with acts of congress, 
the carcasses of animals slaughtered under the provisions of the four pre- 
ceding sections shall at the time of slaughter, if not condemned, be stamped 
or branded by the inspector thereof in like manner as those inspected by the 
United States bureau of animal industry for interstate trade, by a stamp 
or brand designed for the purpose by the cattle bureau of the state board 
of agriculture, which shall be furnished by it to the board of health of a 
city or town applying therefor. Such stamps shall be uniform in design 
throughout the commonwealth, but shall contain the name of the city or 
town in which they are used. [Approved June 4, 1909. 



SLAUGHTER OP ANIMALS AND INSPECTION AND SALE OP 

CARCASSES. 



Acts of 1909, Chapter 474. 
An Act relative to the slaughter op animals and to the inspection 

and sale op carcasses thereof. 
Be it enacted, etc., as follows: 

Section 1. Chapter three hundred and twenty-nine of the acts of the 
year nineteen hundred and eight is hereby amended by adding at the end 
thereof the following new section : — Section S. This act shall not affect 
the provisions of section seven of chapter ninety of the Revised Laws, as 
affected by section three of chapter one hundred and sixteen of the acts 
of the year nineteen hundred and two: provided, however, that nothing in 



95 

this act shall be construed to permit the sale, offer for sale, or keeping with 
intent to sell, for food, of meat infected in any degree with tuberculosis 
or any other disease. 

Section 2. This act shall take effect upon its passage. [Approved June 

4, 1909. 

INSPECTION OF DOMESTIC ANIMALS AND MARKING OF 

CARCASSES. 



Acts of 1909, Chapter 476. 
An Act relative to the marking of certain carcasses and the inspec- 
tion OF CERTAIN DOMESTIC ANIMALS. 

Be it enacted, etc., as folloius: 

Section 1. Section one hundred and four of chapter seventy-five of the 
Revised Laws, as set forth in chapter two hundred and twenty of the acts 
of the year nineteen hundred and three, is hereby amended by inserting 
after the word " provided ", in the tenth line, the words : — or whoever not 
being a member of the board of health, or a duly appointed inspector stamps 
or brands a carcass or any part thereof required by the provisions of the 
preceding section to be stamped or branded, or whoever being a member 
of a board of health or a duly appointed inspector permits or allows the 
use of his stamp or brand by one not a member of a board of health or 
a duly appointed inspector, or whoever counterfeits any stamp or brand 
required by the provisions of the five preceding sections, or whoever stamps 
or brands any carcass or any part thereof with any counterfeit stamp or 
brand, — so as to read as follows : — Section 104. The carcasses of animals 
slaughtered under the provisions of the five preceding sections and not 
stamped or branded as provided in the preceding section shall be deemed 
unfit for human food and shall not be sold or offered for sale. "Whoever 
sells, or offers for sale, or has in his possession with intent to sell, a carcass 
or any part thereof required by the provisions of the preceding section 
to be stamped or branded, which has not been stamped or branded as 
therein provided, or whoever not being a member of a board of health, or 
a duly appointed inspector stamps or brands a carcass or any part thereof 
required by the provisions of the preceding section to be stamped or branded, 
or whoever being a member of a board of health or a duly appointed in- 
spector permits or allows the use of his stamp or brand by one not a 
member of a board of health or a duly appointed inspector, or whoever 
counterfeits any stamp or brand required by the provisions of the five pre- 
ceding sections, or whoever stamps or brands any carcass or any part thereof 
with any counterfeit stamp or brand shall be punished by a fine of not 
more than one hundred dollars or by imprisonment for not more than sixty 
days, or by both such fine and imprisonment. [Approved June 7, 1909. 



96 



AMENDMENT OP LAW RELATIVE TO THE CARE AND RE- 
MOVAL OF PERSONS INFECTED WITH DISEASES DAN- 
GEROUS TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH. 



Acts of 1909, Chapter 391. 
An Act relative to the care and removal by the state board of char- 
ity op persons infected with diseases dangerous to the public 
health. 
Be it enacted, etc., as follows: 

Section 1. Section one of chapter three hundred and ninety-five of the 
acts of the year nineteen hundred and four is hereby amended by striking 
out the words " and may remove such person thereto " at the end of said 
section, and inserting in place thereof the words : — and shall have the same 
authority to remove such persons thereto as is conferred upon boards of 
health by the provisions of section thirty-six of chapter seventy-five of the 
Eevised Laws, as amended by chapter three hundred and sixty-five of the 
acts of the year nineteen hundred and six, — so as to read as follows : — 
Section 1. The state board of charity may, if found expedient, remove any 
person who is infected with a disease dangerous to the public health, and 
who is maintained or liable to be maintained by the commonwealth, to any 
hospital provided for state paupers, or may provide such place of reception 
for such person as is judged best for his accommodation and the safety of 
the public, which place shall be subject to the regulations of the board, and 
shall have the same authority to remove such persons thereto as is conferred 
upon boards of health by the provisions of section thirty-six of chapter 
seventy-five of the Revised Laws, as amended by chapter three hundred and 
sixty-five of the acts of the year nineteen hundred and six. 

Section 2. Any expenses incurred in carrying out the provisions of this 
act may be paid from the annual appropriation for expenses in connection 
with smallpox ;ui<l other diseases dangerous to the public health. 

Section 3. This act shall take effect upon its passage. [Approved May 
14, 1909. 



97 



AMENDMENT OF LAW RELATIVE TO THE EXPENSE OF 
CARING FOR PERSONS INFECTED WITH DISEASES 
DANGEROUS TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH. 



Acts of 1900, Chapter 380. 
An Act relative to the expense of caring for persons infected with 

diseases dangerous to the public health. 
Be it enacted, etc., as follows: 

Section 1. Section one of chapter two hundred and thirteen of the acts 
of the year nineteen hundred and two, as amended by section one of chapter 
three hundred and eighty-six of the acts of the year nineteen hundred and 
seven, is hereby further amended by adding at the end thereof the words : — 
and also in any case liable to be maintained by the commonwealth when 
public aid has been rendered to such sick person, a written notice shall be 
sent to the state board of charity, containing such information as will show 
that the person named therein is a proper charge to the commonwealth, 
and reimbursement shall be made for the reasonable expenses incurred within 
five days next before such notice is mailed, and thereafter until such sick 
person is removed under the provisions of chapter three hundred and ninety- 
five of the acts of the year nineteen hundred and four, or is able to be so 
removed without endangering his or the public health, — so as to read as 
follows : — Section 1. Reasonable expenses incurred by the board of health 
of a city or town or by the commonwealth in making the provision required 
by law for persons infected with smallpox or other disease dangerous to 
the public health shall be paid by such person or his parents if he or they 
be able to pay, otherwise by the city or town in which he has a legal settle- 
ment, upon the approval of the bill by the board of health of such city or 
town or by the state board of charity; and such settlements shall be deter- 
mined by the overseers of the poor, and by the state board of charity in cases 
cared for by the commonwealth. If the person has no settlement, such 
expense shall be paid by the commonwealth, upon the approval of bills 
therefor by the state board of charity. In all cases of persons having settle- 
ments, a written notice sent within the time required in the case of aid given 
to paupers, shall be sent by the board of health, or by the officer or board 
having the powers of a board of health in the city or town where the person 
is sick, to the board of health, or to the officer or board having the powers 
of a board of health in the city or town in which such person has a settle- 
ment, who shall forthwith transmit a copy thereof to the overseers of the 
poor of the place of settlement. In case the person has no settlement, such 
notice shall be given to the state board of health, in accordance with the 
provisions of section fifty-two of chapter seventy-five of the Revised Laws, 
and also in any case liable to be maintained by the commonwealth when 
public aid has been rendered to such sick person, a written notice shall 



98 

be sent to the state board of charity, containing such information as will 
show that the person named therein is a proper charge to the commonwealth, 
and reimbursement shall be made for the reasonable expenses incurred 
within five days next before such notice is mailed, and thereafter until such 
sick person is removed under the provisions of chapter three hundred and 
ninety-five of the acts of the year nineteen hundred and four, or is able 
to be so removed without endangering his or the public health. 

Section 2. This act shall take effect on the first day of July in the year 
nineteen hundred and nine. [Approved May 13, 1909. 



WORKS FOR THE TREATMENT OR PURIFICATION OF 

SEWAGE. 



Acts of 1909, Chapter 433. 
An Act to provide for the proper maintenance and enlargement of 

works for the treatment or purification of sewage. 
Be it enacted, etc., as follows: 

Section 1. Cities, towns, persons, firms or corporations, owning or op- 
erating filter beds or other works for the treatment or purification of sewage 
shall provide and maintain works adequate for the treatment of the sewage 
at all times, and shall operate such works in such manner as will prevent 
a nuisance therefrom or the discharge or escape of unpurified or imperfectly 
purified sewage or effluent into any stream, pond or other water, or other 
objectionable result. 

Section 2. The board of sewer commissioners or other board or officer 
having charge of the sewers in cities and towns shall have authority to make 
such regulations regarding the use of the sewers as are necessary to prevent 
the entrance or discharge therein of any substance which may tend to inter- 
fere with the flow of sewage or the proper operation of the sewerage system 
or disposal works. 

Section 3. The state board of health, if convinced, upon examination. 
that a filter bed or other works for the treatment or purification of sewage 
causes the pollution of a stream, pond or other water, or is likely to become 
a source of nuisance or create objectionable results in its neighborhood by 
reason of defective construction, inadequate capacity or negligence or in- 
efficiency in maintenance or operation or from other cause, may issue notice 
in writing to the city, town or person owning or operating such works re- 
quiring such enlargement or improvement in the works or change in the 
method of operation thereof as ranj be necessary for the proper mainte- 
nance and operation of the works and the efficient purification and disposal 
of the sewage. In case the state board of health is satisfied after investi- 
gation that the unsatisfactory operation of a sewage disposal system is due 
wholly or partly to the discharge into the system of manufacturing waste 



99 

or other substance of such character as to interfere with the efficient op- 
eration of said works, said board may if necessary prohibit thi ee of 
such waste or other mateiial or may regulate the entrance thereof into the 
system, or may require the treatment of such waste or other material in such 
manner as may be necessary to prevent its interference with the operation 
of the works. 

Section 4. The supreme judicial court, or the superior court, shall have 
jurisdiction in equity to enforce the provisions of this act upon petition of 
the state board of health or of any party interested. 

Section 5. This act shall take effect upon its passage. [Approved May 
21, 1909. 



DR. DAVIS'S ANTI-HEADACHE : PROHIBITION OF SALE RE- 
MOVED. 



This preparation, as now presented to the trade, being properly labeled, 
may be sold at retail. 

OSCAR'S SAUCE. 



In the Bulletin of this Board for April, 1909, this sauce was adver- 
tised as being improperly labeled, in that the presence of benzoic acid 
as a preservative was not indicated. As now put upon the market, this 
preparation does not show the presence of benzoic acid. 



PENNSYLVANIA'S NEW COCAINE LAW. 



An Act regulating the sale, prescription, and possession of cocaixe. 
its salts, derivatives, or compounds; alpha or beta eucaine, their 
salts, derivatives, or compounds; or ant substance or preparation 
containing cocaine, its salts, derivatives, or compounds, or alpha 
or beta eucaine, their salts, derivatives, or compounds; and pre- 
scribing penalties for violation thereof. 

Section 1. Be it enacted, &c, That no person shall sell, furnish, or give 
away cocaine, or its salts, derivatives or compounds ; or alpha or beta eueaine, 
or their salts, derivatives or compounds; or any substance or preparation 
containing cocaine, its salts, derivatives, or compounds, or alpha or beta 
eueaine, their salts, derivatives, or compounds, except upon the prescription 



100 

of a duly registered, practicing physician, or of a dentist, or of a veter- 
inarian, which prescription shall be filled but once, and of which no copy 
shall be taken by any one, and which shall be retained and kept on file by 
the dispenser thereof for a period of at least five years; nor shall any 
physician, dentist, or veterinarian prescribe, sell, or give away any cocaine, 
or its salts, derivatives, or compounds, or any alpha or beta eucaine or their 
salts, derivatives, or compounds, to any person known to such physician, 
dentist, or veterinarian to be an habitual user of those drugs. 

Provided, That the provisions of this act shall not apply to persons en- 
gaged in the wholesale drug trade, regularly selling cocaine, its salts, 
derivatives, or compounds, or alpha or beta eucaine, their salts, deiivatives, 
or compounds, to persons engaged in the retail drug trade, under the fol- 
lowing conditions: That the wholesale dealer shall affix or cause to be affixed 
to the bottle, box, vessel, or package containing the article sold, and upon 
the outside wrapper of the package as originally put up, a label distinctly 
displaying the name and quantity of cocaine or its salts, alpha or beta 
eucaine, or their salts, sold, and the word " poison," with the name and 
place of business of the seller — all printed in red ink: And provided also, 
That the wholesale dealer shall, before delivering any of the articles, make 
or cause to be made, in a book kept for the purpose, an entry of the sale 
thereof, stating the date of sale, the quantity, name, and form in which sold, 
the name and address of the purchaser, and the name of the person by 
whom the entry is made, — and the said book shall be always open for 
inspection by the proper authorities, and shall be preserved for at least 
five years after the date of the last entry made therein: And provided also, 
That any manufacturer may sell to another manufacturer of the same article 
or to a wholesale dealer in drugs, or a wholesale dealer in drugs may sell 
to a manufacturer of the same article or to another wholesale dealer in 
drugs, alkaloid cocaine, or its salts, derivatives, or compounds, or alpha 
or beta eucaine, or their salts, derivatives, or compounds, or any substance 
or preparation containing cocaine, its salts, derivatives or compounds, 
alpha or beta eucaine, their salts, derivatives, or compounds, in their original 
package. Such package shall be labelled as herein provided, and shall be 
securely sealed. Each manufacturer and each wholesale dealer in drugs 
shall, before the delivery or at the time of the receipt, as the case may 
be, of any such drug, enter or cause to be entered in a book to be kept by 
them respectively for that purpose, a record of the purchase and sale of such 
drug, stating the date of purchase and the name and address of the person 
to whom sold, the quantity, name and form in which sold, and a description 
of the package or container in which sold, and how sealed, and there shall 
also be entered in such book, at the place of such record, a statement that 
such drug Avas sold or purchased, as the case may be, in the original package, 
that the seals thereon Avere undamaged and unbroken, and the labels were 
attached thereto as herein provided and were not in any manner defaced 
or damaged, which statement shall be signed by the person selling such drug, 
in the book herein required to be kept by him. Each manufacturer and 



101 

each wholesale dealer shall also file, as a part of this record, all orders for 
cocaine, its salts, derivatives, or compounds, or alpha or beta eucaine, their 
salts, derivatives, or compounds; or any substance or preparation containing 
its salts, derivatives, or compounds; alpha or beta eucaine, their salts, 
derivatives, or compounds, from other dealers. 

And further, it shall be the duty of all Avholesale dealers to make quarterly 
reports of their sales to other dealers, -wholesalers or retailers, of cocaine 
or its salts, derivatives, or compounds, or any substance or preparation con- 
taining cocaine, its salts, derivatives or compounds, alpha or beta eucaine, 
their salts, derivatives, or compounds, to the State Pharmaceutical Exam- 
ining Board, upon blanks to be provided for this purpose by the said Board. 

Section 2. Any person violating any of the provisions of this act shall 
be sentenced to pay a fine of not more than five hundred dollars, and undergo 
an imprisonment of not more than two years, or both, or either, at the dis- 
cretion of the court. 

Section 3. That if any person — not being a practicing physician, den- 
tist, or veterinarian, or manufacturer, or wholesale or retail dealer in drugs 
— shall have in his or her possession any cocaine, alpha or beta eucaine, 
or their salts, or any patent or proprietary remedies containing the same, 
except by reason of a prescription of a practicing physician, dentist, or 
veterinarian, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction 
thereof, be sentenced to pay a fine of not more than one hundred dollars, 
and undergo an imprisonment of not more than six months, or both or 
either, at the discretion of the court. 

Section 4. That the enforcement of this act shall be entrusted to the 
State Pharmaceutical Examining Board, appointed under the act of May 
twenty-fourth, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-seven, who shall ap- 
point to carry out the provisions of this act an executive secretary, and 
shall also have power to employ such agents, chemists, and assistants as may 
be necessary for this purpose. 

Section 5. That " An act regulating the sale or prescription of cocaine, 
or any patent or proprietary remedy containing cocaine, and prescribing 
penalties for the violation thereof," approved the twenty-second day of 
April, one thousand nine hundred and three (Pamphlet Laws), is hereby 
repealed. 

Section 6. All acts or parts of acts inconsistent herewith be and the 
same are hereby repealed. 

Section 7. Be it further enacted that this act shall be in force and effect 
at once. [Approved the 8th day of May, A.B. 1909. 



7 . >A 



MONTHLY VI J BULLETIN 



OF THE 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH 



OF 



MASSACHUSETTS. 



An official publication of the State Board of Health of Massachusetts, issued monthly 
from the office of the Board, 145 State House, Boston, Mass. 



New Series. JUNE, 1909. Vol. 4. No. 6. 



Entered at the Post-office at Boston, Feb. 15, 1906, as Second-class Matter. Act 

of Jult 16, 1894. 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. 



HENRY P. WALCOTT, M.D., CAMBRIDGE, Chairman. 



JULIAN A. MEAD, M.D., Watertown. 
HIRAM F. MILLS, C.E., LAWRENCE. 
GERARD C. TOBEY, ESQ., Wareham. 



JAMES W. HULL, PlTTSFIEl.D. 
CHARLES H. PORTER, QUINCY. 
ROBERT W. LOYETT, M.D., Boston. 



MARK W. RICHARDSON, M.D., Secretary. 



BOSTON: 

WEIGHT & POTTEE PEINTTNG CO., STATE PRINTERS, 

18 Post Office Square. 

1909. 



TABLE OF CONTENT.-. 



Page 

Weekly retunjs of deaths from cities and towns of more than 10,000 population, . 105 

:ly returns of deaths from certain infectious diseases, 109 

t^tds of cases of infectious diseases, 110 

Monthly report on inspection of food and drugs, ....... Ill 

MM for violations of the law relating to food and drugs, .... 112 

List of adulterated foods, etc., for J-::- . 113 

Inspection of dairies, 115 

Proprietary preparation advertised as unsalable in June. 1909, 117 

The differentiation of outbreaks of typhoid fever due to vrater. milk, flies and con- 
tact 117 

lrniqoet, 123 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CITIES AND TOWNS 
OF MORE THAN 10,000 POPULATION. 



Week ending Jt/ne ">. 1909. 



Deaths from — 



CITIES AND TOWNS. 



Boston, 

Worcester, 

Fall River, 

Cambridge, 

Lowell, 

New Bedford, 

Lynn, . 

Springfield, 

Lawrence, . 

Somerville, 

Brockton, . 

Holyoke, . 

Maiden, 

Chelsea, 

Newton, 

Salem, 

Haverhill, . 

Fitchburg, 

Everett, 

Quincy, 

Taunton, . 

Waltham, . 

Pittsfield, . 

Brookline, . 

Gloucester, 

North Adams, 

Northampton, 

Chicopee, . 

Med ford, . 

Beverly, 

Leominster, 

Hyde Park, 

Melrose, 

Newburyport, 

Revere, 

Westiield, . 

Woburn, . 

Peabody, . 

Marlborough, 

Attleborough, 

Adams, 

Clinton, 

Gardner, . 

Milford, . 

Watortown, 

Plymouth. . 

Southbridge, 

Weymouth, 

Framingham, 

Wakefield, 

Webster. . 

Arlington. . 

Greenfield, 



Total of reporting towns, 



6-24.491 
136,476 
II 6,486 
102.11-2 
96,380 
85,516 
84,623 
84,237 
78,000 
76,049 
55,039 
53,590 
41.941 
40,080 
39,642 
39.019 
38,362 
34.263 
33.597 
31,937 
30.967 
28,761 
27.932 
26.674 
26.011 
22.150 
21.075 
21,049 
20.921 
16,386 
16.030 
15.609 
15,459 
14,834 
14.820 
14.750 
14.522 
14.512 
14,456 
13.913 
13.685 
13.105 
13.066 
12,722 
12.676 
12,514 
11.848 
11.798 
11.749 
11.124 
11,109 
10.520 
10.140 



178 
34 
35 
35 
40 
25 
17 
27 
25 

13 

20 
8 
7 
6 
9 
6 
4 

11 
3 

12 
6 
9 
S 
3 
6 
3 



""- = ' • 

— i - ■- 

fa I - \ : ~ ± I -i 

= -; I = - - S - = 

- - ■- - - - — 

- - e. - \ \ c a 



IB 

11 

1. 
3 

17 

13 
- 
4 
9 
3 
1 
- 
2 
1 
3 



B 

4 
US 

14 
6 
9 
6 
9 

> 
6 
3 

11 
4 



- 


15 


3 


_ 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


4 




1 


- 


3 


3 


- 


- 


- 


3 






- 


o 


1 


•■> 



3 
3 

3 

1 
2 
3 



4 
6 

2 
1 
1 
1 



1 - 

1 



2 - 
- 1 



3 



1 1 
1 



- 
1 



Recapitulation. 



2,379,468 651 164 






: 14 



'• The populations wore estimated upon the rare of growth from 1900 to 1! - 

Gloucester, North Adams and Clinton were allowed to stand as in l! 

during the five-veaT period. The staia in the population of Lowell is » of a 

part of the town" of Tewksbury. The population of I.awv. s census 

owing to the building: of the newWood and Arlington mills, an increase 
by the Lawrence 






Week ornate Jim 12, I S 













~ 


^ 




Deaths r»OM 




CITIES AXD TC ; 1 




M 




s 


> 




i 














- '. 














•^ l 




~ c 






-. '- 








- = 


: - 














SB 


»■ — 


! ► 


z : s 


Z — 


5 


£ 






a 


— 


— 


" 


- 


— 


r- S 


Boston 6*24 4 1 


185 


37 


49 


:■ 


11 


3 




Waneetor, 








17 


39 : 


12 


11 


3 


5 


1 


- 


r, 








". 


25 


11 


11 


2 


2 


_ 


— 1 — 


Cam"'.: .: 








: ..iu 


29 


5 


" 


3 


- 


- 


- 1 - 


. 










26 


11 


10 


5 


5 


- 


- 












25 


12 


3 


- 


1 


1 


- 


--T" 








- 


19 




4 


- 


2 


1 


1 


zfield, 










22 


6 


» 


3 




1 


- 


Lawrence, . 








- ■ 


17 


6 


9 


2 


3 


- 


1 


: 








- - 


20 


5 


" 


3 


2 


- 


- 


. 








-- 


10 


4 


5 


2 


1 


- 


1 


Holyoke, . 








' ' ■ 


13 


: 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


en, 








41 41 


: 




1 










. 








4 .:-. 




3 


1 










Hewtm, 








- • ,: 


n 


3 


3 


1 


o 


- 


- 


n, 










ii 


: 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hiverii::. . 










12 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


— 1 — 


'jorg, . 








34,263 


1 


1 


1 


1 


" 


- 


- 


£~e:~::. 








.. : : 


8 


o 


3 


- 


2 


1 


- 


. 








\ 


8 


1 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


. 








- 


13 


o 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 1 — 


Waltbam, . 








-■ -■:. 


6 


2 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Geld, . 








.- \ . 


5 


— 


3 


- 


1 


- 


— J — 


Brookline, . 








_ » 


i 








- 






■ 








26.011 


6 


2 












Adams. 








22450 


7 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 










.: "- 


6 


1 


2 


- 


1 


1 


- 


Cbicopee, . 








21.049 


6 


2 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


' 








20.921 


6 














. 








1 • 


3 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Leominster, 










7 


— 


3 


2 


1 


— 


- 


-ark, 








15,609 


o 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


■ oee, 








15,459 


S 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 










14.834 


4 














Severe, 










- 






















;- to 


: 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


'•'•' 








: S22 


5 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


• 








14.512 






- 










igfc. 










3 


o 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- - 


Attleborongh, 








13,913 


2 















Adanr- 










3 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 




Clinton, 








18,105 










- 




- - 





































2 





- 


















! J 


' 


1 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


uh, . 








12,514 
















South bridge, 








11,848 


3 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- - 


Weymoan 










6 


1 


2 


- 


1 


- 


1 


Framirjgham, 








11,748 


7 


2 


6 


4 


2 


- 


- 1 - 


"Wakefield, 








11,124 
















. 
























Arllnf" 








10,520 


3 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


• eld, 








10,140 


5 


~ 


1 


' 


1 


' 





//• capitulation. 



. ' reporting towns, 



2,366,363 629 150 170 



5:. 63 



1 3 



107 



Week ending June 19, 1909. 





£ 


■= 


n 

> 




\>Y.K1UH 


FMOM — 




Wg 

O 

si 


s 














CITIES AND TOWNS. 


a fl 


M 

c . 

= 1 




i 


9) 
> 








1« 




"a 2 

— -r, 


"~ a 

as 

Is 


1 




~z- 


- 

a 
- 




— 


X 


Q 


£ 


< 


— 


- 




35 


Boston 


624,491 


188 


43 


66 


25 


20 


5 


2 


2 


Worcester, 








136,476 


38 


9 


7 


2 


4 


_ 






Fall River, 








106,486 


38 


16 


19 


8 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


32 


11 


18 


2 


8 


1 


_ 


1 


Lowell, 








96,380 


29 


9 


11 


5 


3 


1 


1 




New Bedford, 








85,516 


19 


7 


6 


3 


2 






_ 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


18 


2 


- 


- 


-. 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Springfield, 








84,237 


16 


5 


4 


- 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


21 


11 


8 


- 


2 


1 


_ 


2 


Somerville, 








76,049 


20 


4 


4 


1 


1 


2 


_ 




Brockton, . 








55,039 


16 


3 


3 


- 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


21 


10 


11 


3 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Maiden, 








41,941 


8 


1 


2 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


6 


1 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Newton, 








39,642 


7 


1 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Salem, 








39,019 


11 


1 


1 


1 




_ 


_ 


_ 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


12 


2 


1 


_ 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


13 


3 


3 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Everett, 








33,597 


3 


- 


1 


_ 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Quincy, 








31,937 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


13 


2 


4 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


6 


2 


3 


- 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


9 


4 


2 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


5 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


4 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


North Adams, 








22,150 


7 


3 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Northampton, 








21,075 


7 





- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


7 


4 


3 


2 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


Medford, . 








20,921 


6 


- 


4 


2 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Beverly, . 








16,386 


4 


- 


3 


1 


o 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Leominster, 








16,030 


5 


- 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


3 


- 


2 


- 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


Melrose, 








15,459 


5 


2 


2 


_ 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Newhuryport, 








14,834 


2 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


5 


- 


- 


_ 




_ 


_ 


_ 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


3 


- 


- 


- 




_ 


_ 


_ 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


4 





- 


_ 




- 


_ 


_ 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


4 


1 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


2 


1 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


3 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


2 





- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


- 


_ 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


5 


- 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


- 


_ 


Mil ford, . 








12,722 


6 


3 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


- 


_ 


Watertown, 








12,676 





- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


3 


1 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


3 





3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


2 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


2 


- 


~ 


- 


~ 


- 


— 


- 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,379,468 650 164 



203 



69 65 ! 11 



108 



Week ending June 26, 1909. 











in. Bsti- 
for 1909. 




> 

o 

B 
B 




DEATHS PBOM- 






CITIES AND TOWNS. 


S» 


u 

c . 
= ? 




a 


- 






3-3 






'= § . 


- § 


_£ 


Z 


gfc 






= S 

a. a 
o ^ 


2 = 


P 


— ; r 

lis 






£ 


5 
a 


■ 






— 




fi 


< 




= 


H 


s 


Boston, | 624,491 


190 


47 


44 


14 


14 


2 


1 


1 


Worcester, 








136,476 


51 


11 


10 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


43 


25 


17 


2 


4 


- 


- 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


36 


6 


11 


3 


6 


- 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


34 


7 


10 


3 


4 


1 


1 


- 


New Bedford, . 








85,516 


33 


13 


10 


5 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


25 


4 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


35 


10 


5 


1 


_ 


- 


- 


1 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


18 


8 


7 


2 


1 


- 


- 


1 


Somerville, 








76,049 


16 


4 


7 


3 


3 


- 


- 


1 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


10 


2 


3 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


21 


13 ! 


8 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


13 


2 


3 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


11 


i 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


10 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


19 


3 


3 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


11 


2 


2 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, . 








34,263 


6 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


11 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


1 


Quincy, 








31,937 


8 


- 


4 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


8 


1 


3 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


10 


- 


3 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


12 


1 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


5 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


7 


- 


2 


- 


1 




1 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


9 


3 


2 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


11 


3 


4 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


5 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


5 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


8 


2 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,8:34 


7 




1 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


5 


2 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, 








14,522 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


3 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13.913 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13.685 


2 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 




Clinton, 








13.105 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 




Gardner, . 








13.066 


4 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 




Mil ford, . 








12,722 


2 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


2 


o 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


" 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 






- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge. 








11,848 


o 


1 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


2 


o 


2 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


3 


2 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








If ',520 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 






- 


■ 


— 


- 


~ 


_ 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towus, 



2,379,468 



735 192 I 181 53 49 



109 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CERTAIN INFECTIOUS 

DISEASES. 



Deaths from Infectious Diseases not specifically mentioned in 
above Tables during the Weeks of June 5, 12, 19 and 20, 1909. 











Wkek bhdiho— 


DISEASE. 


Place. 


June 5. 


June 12. June 19. 


June 26. 


Cerebro-spinal meningitis, 


Boston, 
Holyoke, 11 . 
Leominster, 
New Bedford, 
Northampton, 
Worcester, 




1 


2 
2 


1 


1 
1 
1 
4 


Scarlet fever, .... 


Boston, 

Cambridge 

Chelsea, 

Fall River 

Lowell, 

Melrose, 

Somerville 

Springfield 

Taunton, 

Worcester, 






1 


2 

1 

1 
- 


1 
1 

1 

1 


1 

1 

1 


Whooping cough, 


Boston, 
Beverly, 
Fall River, 
Lawrence, . 
Milford, 
New Bedford, 
Revere, 
Springfield, 
Watertown, 




2 

1 

1 

1 


1 

1 I 
1 


1 

1 

1 

1 
1 




Boston, 

Cambridge 

Chicopee, 

Holyoke, 

Lawrence, 

Worcester, 






1 

1 
1 


- 


1 ( 


1 
1 

1 


Tuberculosis other than pulmo- 
nary. 


Boston, 
Brockton, . 
Brookline, 
Cambridge, 
Fall River, 
Haverhill, 
Holyoke, . 
Lawrence, . 
Leominster, 




3 

I 
i 

1 

2 


4 

1 

2 
3 


6 

1 

2 
1 


4 

1 
1 
1 



110 





I'lace. 


Wkkk ending — 


DISEASE. 


June 5. 


June 12. 


June 19. 


June 26. 


Tuberculosis other than pulmo- 
nary — Con. 


Lynn,. 
Pittsfield, . 
Salem, 
Quincy, 
"Weymouth, 
Woburn, . 


1 


2 
1 


- 1 

: i 

- i - 
i i 

i 


Tubercular meningitis, 


Maiden, 
Hyde Park, 


- 


1 
1 


- 




Boston, 
Brockton, . 


1 


1 


- 


1 



WEEKLY RETURNS OP CASES OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES. 



Cases of Infectious Diseases reported during the Weeks of 
June 5, 12, 19 and 26, 1909. 

[Under the provisions of section 52 of chapter 75 of the Revised Laws.] 



Wekk ending - 



Diphtheria, 

Measles, 

Scarlet fever, .... 

Typhoid fever, .... 
Tuberculosis, pulmonary, . 
Cerebro-spinal meningitis, . 
Whooping cough, .... 

Varicella 

Erysipelas, 

Mumps, 

Ophthalmia neonatorum, 
Tuberculosis other than pulmonary, 

Smallpox, 

Leprosy, 

Trichinosis, 

Tuberculosis meningitis, 



125 

483 

134 

40 

132 

1 

29 

36 

1 



133 

533 

152 

29 

142 

3 

15 

45 

3 



115 
472 
127 
37 
137 

20 
32 



107 
563 
129 
33 
139 
2 

20 

44 



Ill 



MONTHLY REPORT ON INSPECTION OF FOOD AND DRUGS. 



The following summary presents the results of the examination of food 
and drugs made by the State Board of Health during the month 
June, 1909 : — 



Articles examined. 



Number 
found 

to be of 
Good 

Quality. 



Butter, 
Cheese, 
Cider, 
Cocoa, 
Cream, 
Cream of tartar, 
Drugs, . 

Flavoring ex- 
tracts : — 

Lemon, 

Vanilla, 
Grape juice, . 
Honey, . 
Horse-radish, 
Ice cream, . 
Jams, jellies and 

preserves 
Maple syrup, 



4 
1 
3 
4 
8 
1 
83 



2 
3 
10 
1 
2 

14 



Number 

adulterated 

or varying 

from the 

Legal 
Standard. 



Articles examined. 



Number 
found 

to be of 
Good 

Quality. 



Number 

adulterated 

or varying 

from the 

Legal 
Standard. 



Meat extracts : — 

Pickled lambs 
tongues, 

Pressed meat, 

Sausages, . 
Milk, . 
Nonalcoholic 

drinks, 
Olive oil, 
Pickles, 

Proprietary foods 
Sardine paste, 
Shrimp paste, 
Spices, . 
Table sauces, 
Vinegar, 

Total, . 



1 

1 

5 

332 

5 

13 
2 
1 
2 
1 
15 
6 



516 



1 
123 



135 



Total. 



1 

1 

6 

455 

5 
18 
2 
1 
2 
1 
15 
6 
2 



651 



The samples of drugs found to be adulterated were : camphor liniment 
syrup, essence of peppermint and tincture of iodine. 

The cities and towns in which samples were collected were : Aver, Bald- 
winville, Braintree, Boston, Burlington, Cambridge, Danvers, Hudson, 
Hull, Hyde Park, Ipswich, Lawrence, Littleton, Lowell, Lynn, Lynnfield, 
Maiden, Marblehead, Mansfield, Medford, Methuen, Milford, Millis, 
Peabody, Quincy, Bevere, Salem, Somerville, Wakefield, Waltham, War- 
ren, Watertown, Westborough, Winchendon, Winchester, Winthrop and 
Woburn. 



112 



PROSECUTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW RELATING 
TO FOOD AND DRUGS. 



Ten convictions were secured during the month of June, 1909, for sell- 
ing adulterated food and drugs, as follows : — 



No. 


Name of Defendant. 


Place. 


Character of Article sold. 


1 


Antonio Cardinali, 


Boston, . 


Olive oil (25 per cent, cot- 
ton-seed oil). 


2 


Antonio Cardinali, 


Boston, . 


Olive oil (25 per cent, cot- 
ton-seed oil). 


3 


Antonio Cardinali, 


Boston, . 


Olive oil (40 per cent, cot- 
ton-seed oil). 


4 


Eugene B. Carpenter, . 


Somerville, . 


Olive oil (60 per cent, cot- 
ton-seed oil) . 


5 


Daniel E. Curnmings, . 


Peabody, 


Milk (35 per cent, added 
water) . 


6 




Braintree, 


Milk (total solids, 11.40). 


7 




Braintree, 


Milk (total solids, 11.80). 


8 


Herbert Leed, .... 


Lawrence, 


Sausage (tomato) . 


9 


William Kingsley, 


Lawrence, 


Sausage (tomato). 


10 


Joseph Laurin, .... 


Lowell, . 


Vinegar. 



Fines imposed, $271.50. 



113 







U 1- — 




" (56= = = = = = S = = SS- 


S - £ 








gga$®0090O09S 








? ; f 




-z-z-z 




: ; t 




"3 -. O* . O, p. . "- ' • ft ft . ft . ft . ft a. ft -r 


-z — ~z 




m Bo-. 5 ;-? — im — t- ._ ,-j . s ~ ? i ~ -a ~ x ~ t ~ — — •■ 

= §*« a-; a*? a« Scjjjm a« a«« So<i a« a« a« 


'O'O'O 




~z-z~z 

> B -_ 


i 


« S^-o >««»•« *»*'0 •= »•« -"= -a --; --TS — 5 

<c ^ 3 s 9 '-S =J3'- ,- - ; 5'*-H' i: 5'"5'*"= , *"=t; 
M os a '*"' a ; a - ~ a <p a ... a ... s a KB 
« S*:J .§=.2*: .2 -S '"J"" 5 •.= ■:.= t.= t 5 -; 

a 0- «.m T^j ©ill s^J *i a --^ -•* a* -— - * - ^ •- 

2 2 u ""« "~n •- 8 J* ° ""° 7° T u -« "« - = 


"3 "3 ~ 

»- _ w 


>, 




*« 


cv a 









asa 




2 ^u-^»*5®*"S*-' tn i-«fc.«n-"fc.« t< «u-wS 


- s 




a s - 


3 


®^®t2 g g^ gco gg gcc gS g« 53 * gS gS g g 

03 a - ? r-1 °-3 & S & h * • Z^ a = ^ ^^ ~h a ~ ft . 


h M h 
- i - 


« 


ftftft 

CC Cl :'. 




:-. -1 ■— 




,S *D „=>> -<N -O „co rt £, .CO .0 ,-r _ci .-* .Sh 


OHH 








a r« * w M -CO ■/'(Zl • Gfi 'CO '71 • rr, ■ rr ■ 

g » 2 ? "S ° "S 2 "S 'S 2 3 2 "H 3 o ^'^ 

ft^j « «) j) ""'j ■" s "• ji mo ■« 91 e ■» » * ""'s «'s ° 


no 00 bo 

0*0 "3 




a «„T fto fto ^0 a o =-0 o-o ^o ^o o<o ^o *o 
w coH HHHHHHHHHHH 


"3 "3 "3 

c o 




HHH 




§ J 
. g . . ... O 






CO * "M 






■M in 2 ^ 






M •— c3 




C3 


3 . 1 . 1 1 . H of 

x s 5*8 




M 
C 


- 2 >l « ® - 

s §• a i - * ^ w 


CC 

c3 


i 

3 


s a. ! | 1 s § ~ 

■^tn „„ a ^3"hS. 
§ §1 -§ B 5 « | w 


s 

CO* 
CO 




2 « fe -2 .2 -2 •" S - 
1 ^ § f I I | 1 




. 




a 

03 


75 

a 
.=> 








o^o .2 -a .2 3 cSch^ 




w 3 -^ o^Su j=a> 






<j §i-s W 0hW6hOO 


<! 




nj 




£ 


a 




5. 


O of 




S 

05 


' ^ 




o 






1 


P 










o 


^ a 

*Soji( ii ^1 ai i as" a i j<i is 


a 




,Hg§§S§ g£S SS 


s 


^ 


^-A , 


. — • — > 


|v.o. 

a o a 

3 5 


^S,-tf~ f o es « 'tf S § 2^ 


&££ 


>* COO OC5CO _ <M COC^CSl 




co <-i eo co N r? 02 1— 1 r~ ^~ co or ~' 


CO i~ t— 


r— cncoo^cjjajcocias co 


— 


* 


asciTHCDiMOiai cncncn cr cCfH 


rt^rt 



114 



o 

EH 

H 

m 
R 
O 

o 

H 

p 

n 
<j 
hi 

>H 
hi 

W 

O 



o 

fl 

En 

<1 

Eh 

I? 



< 

w 
O 

Eh 
W 





(HUt->^lHl->>-<<-ltHl-l(->l-> — 




C2CD©a}cDQ}Q}©CDCD©$0 




^^4J*J*J-4-'*J-U--'*-'-"*-l b 




eScScSrtcSrtrtdrtrtcJcJ© 




&££&£&&££&& St- 3 




r d r 3rrtrrtt;rri , S r e , S r t;'0'0 rt 




"T3 T3 m rrt "3 "3 'O 'O T3 'O t3 'C — 








rt «rtrtrtrt rt ^rt«c:rt.S 




g ® ® a> 2 s> S»»S»2a 






'rt 'rt '£ •£ "3 '5 eg '?. '5 <fl "§'3 w 

nci'£'£ae a csa'£'a'- 
oos§o5oooo o^ 

ooggogocoOoUc 


i 








o 






h h , , t-c <h J-, n ^ ^ Sh 


« 














n^'x3 r ^ r On3 r O r O^<73'OT3'0'^ ,-» 




^^^^^^^^"^^^^■q >■ 






oooooooo ooo«>£ 




wi/icncowcoaj^mMcooo © 




ooooooooooooo^ 








HHHHHHBHHHHHH 


o 
•a 


■ 


o 


go 




EC 


£ 


- c3 


o 


-s 




so go - 




2 S- 13 


as 


1 S* 


A 

^ 




c 


1 -ss 


3 


1 £* 


o 


4= ® 






-T a 0J 


3 
C 
a 

S3 


a cd 3 

a g® 


o 


B 


a ofe 
u g 

~ 03 


t5 




-3 .m.2 








a 5 d 




* 5,d 




Q feO 


"a. 
1 


. . 


ao 








o 




^ 












<3 














^* .m.*" 












g gg 


u ci 






Bog 

t = 03 

Sz; co 




MM«?:.-c«:coT|(^Tf-f 



115 



INSPECTION OF DAIRIES. 



During the month of June, 1909, 208 dairies were examined in the 
following places : — 



Placb. 


Number 
examined. 


Number found 

to present 

no Objectionable 

Features. 


Per Cent. 


Number to 

which Letters 

were sent. 


Per Cent. 


Acton, . 












Third inspection, 




2 


- 


- 


2 


100.00 


Andover, 




4 


1 


25.00 


3 


75.00 


Belchertown, 




5 


2 


40.00 


3 


60.00 


Second inspection, 




7 


5 


71.43 


2 


28.57 


Chicopee, 




1 


1 


100.00 


- 


- 


Second inspection, 




4 


1 


25.00 


3 


75.00 


Third inspection, 




1 


1 


100 00 


- 


_ 


Clinton, 




. 2 


2 


100.00 


- 


_ 


Second inspection, 




4 


3 


75.00 


1 


25.00 


Framingham, 




21 


18 


85.71 


3 


14.29 


Second inspection, 




27 


24 


88.89 


3 


11.11 


Granby, 




4 


1 


25.00 


3 


75 00 


Second inspection, 




54 


23 


42.59 


31 


57.41 


Third inspection, 




2 


2 


100. 00 


- 


- 


Hamilton, 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Second inspection, 




1 


- 


- 


1 


100.00 


Hoi yoke, 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Second inspection, 




1 


1 


100. 00 


- 


- 


Ipswich, 




5 


4 


80.00 


1 


20.00 


Second inspection, 




35 


14 


40.00 


21 


60.00 


Ludlow, 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Second inspection, 




3 


- 


- 


3 


100.00 


Maiden, 




1 


- 


- 


1 


100.00 


Second inspection, 




6 


1 


. 16.67 


5 


83.33 


Fourth inspection, 




8 


1 


12.50 


7 


87.50 


Melrose, 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Fourth inspection, 




2 


1 


50.00 


1 


50.00 


Saugus, . 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Fifth inspection, 




1 


- 


- 


1 


100.00 


South Hadley, 




1 


- 


- 


1 


100.00 


"Westfield, 




1 


1 


100.00 


- 


- 


Second inspection, 




5 


1 


20.00 


4 


80.00 



Total number of dairies examined, 208 

Number found to be free from objectionable conditions, 108 

Number to which letters were sent, 100 

Total number of conditions to which attention was called, 261 

Percentage of dairies which passed inspection, 51.92 

Andover. 

Livingston, Charles W. 



Belchertown Town Farm *t 
Clough, William *t 
Couture, E 



Belchertown. 

Couture, O. M. 
Lambson, H. M. 



McKillop, H. E. 
Underwood, A. C. 



* Second inspection. 



t Reported favorably on first inspection. 



116 



Beauchard, John * 



Chicopee. 



Chritoii, Emil 



Paul, C. A. & Son I 



Clougherty, M. 
Gorman, John 



Clinton. 

Harris, Estate of Mrs. 
A. K.*f 



Kanis, Herman *t 
Sawyer, Estate of Eli *t 



Atwell, Tliomas * 
Barteaux, J. A.* 
Barton, C. C.*t 
Belches, D. M. 
Benjamin, B. 
Bowditch, D. I.*t 
Bowditch, N. I.*f 
Bowlker, T. J.*t 
Bradford, Robert 
Capen, E. A. 
Cutting, Charles 
Cutting, John 
Eaton, Charles F. 
Ellis, Moses 



Framingham. 

Esterbrook, E. L.*t 
Forester, G. C * 
Forster, William P. 
Framingham Town Farm 
Hewett, M. E* 
Hosmer, W. S. 
Jackson, Mrs Mary A. 
Kenton, L. B.»| 
Kessel, R.*t 
Klous, H. D.*f 
Loker, W. W. 
Long, R. H.* 
May, Edward P. 
Merriam, J. A.* 



Monahan, Michael 
Mullen, John * 
Noyes, Charles L.* 
Parker, Peter * 
Parsons, C. P.*t 
Paul, Frank E. 
Perkins, R. F. 
Sampson, Tliomas * 
Sanderson, G. O.* 
Shilliedy, T.« 
Stenson, A. 0.*t 
Walsh, William H. 
Warren, E. R.*t 
Winch, Bert * 



Grariby. 



Barnes, Dexter R.* 
Batchelder, William * 
Beaudoin, O.J 
Benson, W. S.* 
Bray, J. A.* 
Crevier, Rev. Charles * 
Dupree, J.* 
Ferry, Clifford W.* 
French, R. A. 



Goldthwait, H. A* 
Guiel Bros.* 
Kane Bros.*f 
Kellogg, Nelson S.* 
McGrath, M. F * 
Moody, Harry G.* 
Moody, Henry H.* 
Mungon, B., Jr.* 
Nutting, Dwight S* 



Nutting, George * 
Prentiss, R. T.*t 
Randall, C. H.* 
Taylor, Charles N* 
Taylor, Horace S.*t 
Taylor, Leon W.* 
Tucker, Oscar *t 
Warner, Arthur \ 



Holyohe. 

Griffin, John P.* 



Appleton, F. R.*| 
Brown, E. N.* 
Brown, Storey * 
Burnham, F. H. 
Chapman; E. I.* 
Goodhue, William * 
Howe, Elmer 



Ipswich. 
Ipswich House of Correc- Kinsman, W. F.*t 



tion *t 
Ipswich Town Farm *t 
Jowett, Charles * 
Jewett, N. M. 
Kimball, Daniel *t 



Perley, D. S.*t 
Underhill, A. R * 
Warner, William F * 
Whipple, George A.* 
Wile, Edward 



Maiden. 



Wein stein, David *t 



Weitzman, E. 



* Second inspection. 

t Reported favorably on llrst inspection. 



t Third inspection. 
§ Fourth inspection. 



117 

Melrose. 

McDonald, Angus $ 

Westfield. 

Higgins, N. H * Talrnadge, W. H. 



PROPRIETARY PREPARATION ADVERTISED AS UNSALABLE 

IN JUNE, 1909. 



Shaw's Malt. Bernheim Distilling Company, Louisville, Ky. (Xo state- 
ment of the percentage of alcohol.) 



THE DIFFERENTIATION OF OUTBREAKS OF TYPHOID FEVER 
DUE TO WATER, MILK, FLIES AND CONTACT. ' 



By John F. Anderson, Passed Assistant Surgeon and Assistant Director Hygienic 

Laboratory United States Public Health and Marine Hospital Service, 

AVashington, D. C. 



Gentlemen : — When I received the invitation from our honorable 
president, Dr. Lewis, to read a paper before this association on the differ- 
entiation of typhoid fever outbreaks due to infected water, milk, etc., I 
fully realized my limitations in dealing with the subject. However, I 
thought that a few observations I had made while investigating in my 
official capacity several epidemics of typhoid fever might be of some 
interest and perhaps profit to you. 

It is a serious reflection upon the people of the United States that, ac- 
cording to the census report for 1900, there were 35,379 deaths in the 
United States that year from typhoid fever, — a preventable disease. 
This loss of life, according to Whipple's calculation, represented money 
loss to the community of $212,000,000 for that year alone. 

The average typhoid death-rate in cities of the United States is about 
35 per 100,000. Whipple states that in the cities about 40 per cent, of the 
typhoid fever is due to water, 25 per cent, to milk, 30 per cent, to con- 
tagion — including fly transmission — and only about 5 per cent, to all 

* Second inspection. § Fourth inspection. 

1 Read before the American Public Health Association at Winnipeg, August, 1908. Reprinted 
from the American Journal of Public Hygiene, May, 1S109. 



118 

other causes. The Board of Officers of the Public Health and Marine 
Hospital Servi* itigating typhoid fever in the District of Columbia, 

found in 1906 that of the cases studied by them about 11 per cent, were 
indefinitely attributed to milk infection, about 7 per cent, to infection by 
contact; in 1907 they definitely attributed about 9 per cent, to milk and 
about 19 per cent, to contact. 

In the study of an outbreak of typhoid fever it is of vital importance, 
first of all, to determine whether the disease is really typhoid fever. For 
this purpose, in addition to the usual bedside methods, two other pro- 
cedures may and should be employed in all doubtful cases. I refer 
to the Widal reaction and to blood cultures. The blood culture is of 
more value than the Widal test, in that cultures can be obtained in the 
first days of the disease. For the examination of the blood we have 
found the bile enrichment method, followed by plating on Endo medium, 
the most satisfactory. By this method, cultures taken in the first week 
of the disease will give positive results in 90 to 100 per cent, of the cases. 

Having determined that the disease prevailing with undue frequency 
is typhoid fever, it is necessary that each case be studied in detail from 
an epidemiological standpoint. In places which require the reporting of 
typhoid fever, the study is much easier than in those where it is not done. 
The essential data can only be obtained by competent persons visiting the 
patients and obtaining all possible information from the patient, nurse 
and family, and by an inspection of the premises. 

It is well to have a map of the city, and as the data for each case are 
collected to indicate the location on the map by sticking in a large pin. A 
glance at this will readily show if the cases are confined to any particular 
locality. 

All data collected should be at once tabulated and carefully studied as 
to the bearing of the various probable sources of infection. 

I shall now take up in detail the special characteristics of outbreaks 
of typhoid fever due to infected water and milk, and to transmission by 
flies, etc. 

Characteristics of Outbreaks dub to "Water. 

The striking characteristics of outbreaks of typhoid fever clue to water 
arc : — 

1. General Distribution of Cases throughout the Area supplied by a 
Particular Water. — The incidence of cases is independent of social con- 
ditions, occupation and age. except that very young children as a rule 
are not affected in equal proportion to other ages. due. perhaps, to the 
difference in susceptibility and to taking less water. 

2. Explosive Onset of the Outbreaks. — When the water supply, pre- 
viously good, becomes suddenly infected, as in the case of Plymouth or 



119 

Butler, Pa., the outbreak begins with great suddenness and violence. 
There is a sudden and great increase in the number of cases reported 
This increase may continue until the sources of infection of the water 
are removed or the water supply changed. If the former be the case there 
is a more gradual decline in the number of cases than when the supply 
is suddenly replaced by a pure one, in which case the decre;i- Iden 

and marked. Secondary cases from contacts may keep the number ab 
normal for a time. 

When there is a continuance of the source of the infection, as in the 
case of the Lowell and Lawrence outbreaks of 1890 and 1892, the or 
is not usually so explosive in character and. the decline is more gradual. 
In Pittsburg, where there is a continual infection of the water supply, the 
disease is more prevalent in the fall and winter, which may be due in part 
to other causes than water. 

When a water supply, such as a river, is subject to continual infection, 
the increase in the number of cases in late summer and fall may be 
attributed to the fact that, as the number of cases increase which supply 
infection for the stream, the amount of infection is correspondingly 
increased. 

3. Seasonal Prevalence ; Spring or Late Winter. — Outbreaks of 
typhoid due to infection of a water supply previously good usually occur 
in the late winter or spring. This is due, as in the case of the Plymouth 
and New Haven epidemics, to the fact that infected discharges are 
thrown on the frozen ground and when thaws or floods come the infection 
is suddenly washed into the stream. 

When a supply becomes infected by the failure of the purification 
methods used, or by a change in the source, the outbreak is, of course, 
independent of season. 

J/-. Comparative Freedom from the Disease of Persons not using the 
Suspected Water. — When there is more than one water supply, or where 
persons use pure bottled water or boil the water, the comparative freedom 
of such persons from the disease is striking. This was well shown in the 
Butler epidemic, where a large part of the first ward of the city received 
their water from deep driven wells; in this ward, with an equal popula- 
tion to the other four wards, there were onry about one-half as many case?. 

5. Inspection of the Water-shed shoivs Evident Sources of Infection. 
— An inspection of the water-shed may show that it is being continu- 
ously infected by discharges of typhoid fever cases. In some cases, as at 
Butler and other places, the discharges ma}^ actually have been allowed to 
go directly into the stream from privies overhanging it. 

6. The Outbreaks may have begun or ended, following a Change of 
the Water Supply. — When a previously good water is replaced for any 



120 

good reason by an unknown water, or a suspected water is replaced by 
one of undoubted purity, the consequent beginning or discontinuance, as 
the case may be, of an outbreak of typhoid would properly be laid to 
water. 

7. Bacteriological and Chemical Examination reveals Evidences of 
Pollution. — While it is practically hopeless to expect to find the typhoid 
bacillus in water, still the finding of B. coli in small amounts of water 
and chemical evidences of pollution are additional evidence against the 
water. 

8. Exclusion of All Other Probable Causes. — This means the exclu- 
sion of milk, food, contact, fly transmission, and other possible sources 
of infection. 

Characteristics of Outbreaks due to Milk. 
On investigating an outbreak of typhoid fever, the following points 
would indicate very strongly that the infection was being introduced 
through the milk : — 

1. Sudden Outbreak of an Unusual Number of Cases followed by a 
Rapid Decline. — The outbreak is frequently sudden in its onset, a large 
number of cases occurring on a certain milk route within a few days. If 
the infection be introduced only once, as by flies, there is a sudden rise, 
followed by a sudden decline in the number of cases. If there is a con- 
tinuance of the infection, as from a bacillus carrier, the onset may be more 
gradual and the decline will be delayed. 

In dairies which do not practice sterilization of bottles, the milk may 
become infected through bottles delivered at houses where there are cases 
of typhoid fever ; these infected bottles are returned to the dairy, refilled 
and delivered to other customers. Where the milk becomes infected by 
washing the cans with infected water, as in the Palo Alto outbreak, the 
number of cases is usually much greater than when infected in other 
ways. After the usual incubation period secondary cases from contacts 
begin to appear. 

2. The Appearance of an Unusual Number of Cases among Customers 
of a Certain Dairy. — The appearance of an unusual number of cases 
without a general increase elsewhere on the route of a dairy should at 
once direct especial attention to the milk. Of course, typhoid fever due 
to infection from other sources may occur among persons supplied by a 
particular dairy, but they will not be found to be chiefly consumers of 
the milk. It is often very striking how the consumers of a dairy whose 
milk is infected may be picked out by the unusual proportion of cases on 
that milk route. Very frequently cases may be traced in persons not 
directly supplied by the suspected dairy, but who have taken this milk 



121 

at the home of some friend or at a restaurant. An increase in the Dumber 
of cases on a certain route, associated with a decrease generally through- 
out the city, is particularly suggestive of milk infection. 

3. Unusual Incidence of Cases among Users of Milk. — It will he- 
found that there is unusual prevalence of typhoid fever among the users 
of milk; the non-consumers escape or develop as secondary cases. A- 
women and children generally use more milk than men, an unusual prev- 
alence of the disease among them is a common feature of milk-borne out- 
breaks. Those families on the suspected route who make a practice of 
pasteurizing their milk escape, except from infection as secondary casi 

If.. More Cases among the Well-to-do than among the Poor. — In a 
milk outbreak there are usually more cases among the well-off, due to 
the fact that they are more able to buy milk and use it in larger quanti- 
ties than the poor, while in fly-borne outbreaks the poor and those living 
under insanitary conditions are more often attacked. 

5. The Finding of the Typhoid Bacillus in the Suspected Milk. — 
This is practically hopeless, as the milk rarely comes under suspicion 
for at least three weeks after having become infected. In addition, the 
technical difficulties are so great that it is an almost hopeless procedure, 
though the isolation of the organism should be attempted. If successful, 
it is absolutely conclusive. 

Characteeistics oe Outbreaks due to Contagion and Transmission 

by Flies. 

It is impossible to state definitely the characteristics of outbreaks of 
typhoid fever due to transmission by flies and to contacts, as in the case 
of milk and water outbreaks. A final conclusion in regard to the source 
of the infection can only be reached by a consideration of all the factors 
involved. 

For purposes of convenience I shall discuss the characteristics of out- 
breaks of typhoid fever due to contagion and transmission by flies at the 
same time. The great part played by flies in the transmission of typhoid 
fever was first emphasized in the masterly " Eeport of the Origin and 
Spread of Typhoid Fever in United States Military Camps during the 
Spanish War/' by Eeed, Vaughan and Shakespeare. They concluded that 
" flies were undoubtedly the most active agents in the spread of typhoid 
fever. Flies alternately visited and fed on the infected fecal matter and 
the food in the mess tents. More than once it happened, when lime had 
been scattered over the fecal matter in the pits, that flies, with their foot 
covered wih lime, were seen walking over the food. Typhoid fever was 
much less frequent among members of messes who had their mess tents 
screened than it was among those who took no such precaution. Typhoid 



122 

fever gradually died out, in the fall of 1898, in the camps at Knoxville 
Mead, with the disappearance of the fly, and this occurred at a time 
of year when in civil practice typhoid fever is generally on the increase. 
The first pits at Knoxville contained, before the first twenty-four hours 
had passed after the arrival of the troops, fecal matter Infected with the 
typhoid bacillus. Flies swarmed everywhere. Instead of abating, the 
disease increased. The soldiers were using the same water used exclu- 
sively by the inhabitants of "West Knoxville, and among the latter there 
was not at that time a case of typhoid fever. Certainly the disease was 
not disseminated through the drinking water. 1 

Alice Hamilton 1 investigated in 1902 an outbreak of fever in the 
nineteenth ward of the city of Chicago. This ward, which only contained 
about one-thirty-sixth of the total population of the city, had between 
one-sixth and one-seventh of all the deaths from typhoid fever. It 
seemed to her that, while the water was undoubtedly the causative factor 
in the epidemic throughout the city, there must be some local cause for 
its undue prevalence in the nineteenth ward. The sanitary arrangements 
in this ward were found to be very bad, and on those streets with the 
worst sanitary arrangements there were the largest number of deaths 
from typhoid fever, irrespective of the poverty of the inhabitants. 

Flies caught in two undrained privies, on the fences of two yards, on 
the walls of two houses and in the room of a typhoid patient were used 
to inoculate eighteen tubes; from five of these tubes the typhoid bacillus 
was isolated. In this outbreak the chain of evidence implicating the fly 
in the spread of the disease was certainly convincing and almost complete. 

The outbreak in the city of Winnipeg, in August, 1904, investigated by 
Dr. E. 0. Jordan, which was confined almost entirely to the poorer part 
of the city, was attributed to transmission by flies and contacts. 

Outbreaks due to direct contact are seen especially in institutions 
where there are typhoid fever cases and in houses where the family and 
friends visit and assist in the care of the patient. In these cases the 
infection is conveyed either directly by the future patient, or indirectly 
by the nurse, to food consumed by others. 

Typhoid carriers, such as the one reported by Soper in the person of a 
cook, who was responsible for at least 28 cases of typhoid fever in fam- 
ilies in whose employ she had been, are instances in which the infection 
is conveyed by a third person. 

The bacilli have been found in practically all of the excretions of 
typhoid fever cases, and it is only by the most scrupulous care on the part 
of the attendant that infection can be avoided for himself and others. 
The Board of Officers of the Public Health and Marine Hospital Serv- 

i Journal American Medical Association, Vol. 40, 1002, p. 576. 



123 

ice, studying typhoid fever in the District of Columbia, attributed about 
7 per cent, of the cases in 190G and about 19 per cent- in 190*3 

infection from other cases. 

The chief characteristics, then, of outbreaks of typhoid fever (3 
transmission by flies and by contact are their local character, their appear- 
ance in places where the sanitary conditions are poor or where they are 
neglected, occurring during the fly season in the case of fly transmission 
and among those most closely associated with the patient. 



THE TYPHOID TOURNIQUET. 



If the simplest epidemiological information could be substituted for 
the so prevalent old wives' fables relating to wells and water, typhoid 
fever could be cut in half merely because then the physician and the 
health officer would begin to act without waiting for water analyses, or 
even for a list of the typhoid cases. The first duty of the health officer 
who knows that typhoid exists in a community is not to make an inv' - - 
gation, but to face the actual status, to treat the emergency symptoms 
without waiting for the discovery of the ultimate cause. If a man i- 
spurting blood from a wounded thigh, the surgeon does not wait to deter- 
mine the exact nature and extent of the lesion, nor even the exact vessel 
concerned, — he throws a tourniquet around the whole limb to stop the 
flow, and then at leisure he investigates, finds the vessel or vessels con- 
cerned, and ties it or them in a systematic fashion, according to approved 
surgical canons. Exactly parallel is the condition of a community suf- 
fering from typhoid. Instead of laboriously searching for the particular 
source — a search which may take weeks, years, or even, as in "Washing- 
ton, D. C, a decade — the proper coiirse is to stop the existing epidemic. 
To do this requires an immensely vigorous publicity campaign, but it can 
be done. In Minnesota our first gun is fired — not at the water supply, 
for we cannot know at first that the water is infected ; not at the milk 
supply, for we cannot know at first that the milk is infected : not at the 
raw food, or flies, we cannot know at first that these are responsible: not 
at fingers, even, although it is always safe to assume that fingers are a 
factor in every outbreak. We cannot attack any one of these, when first 
called in, because at that time Ave do not know which is the cause. We 
attack every one at once, as the surgeon in the parable ligatures the whole 
limb. Later we pick out at leisure the particular source and cut that off. 

1 Extract from a paper by H. W. Hill, M.D., entitled "The Epidemiological Diagnosis and 
Treatment of Typhoid Outbreaks." American Journal of Public Hygiene, May, 1909. 



124 

The method is very simple. On finding a typhoid outbreak in a town, 
we issue in the papers, display on the streets and address to every house- 
holder the following placard: — 

To the Citizens of . 



Typhoid Fever is Epidemic in . 

The Minnesota State Board of Health is investigating this epidemic to find 
its exact source. Meantime govern yourselves as follows : — 

1. Typhoid fever is contracted solely by the mouth. If you do not put the 
poison of typhoid fever into your mouth you will never contract typhoid fever. 
Therefore, watch the mouth. 

2. Do not eat or drink anything (water, milk, oysters, fresh vegetables or 
anything else) unless it has been first boiled, broiled, baked, roasted, fried 
or otherwise thoroughly heated through and through. 

3. Do without all food or drink which has not first been thus heated. 
(Canned or bottled foods or drinks (other than milk or water) are not 
included in this.) 

4. If living in the same house with a typhoid fever patient, do not handle 
your own food, or food intended for any one else, even if it has been heated, 
except with hands that have been thoroughly washed with soap and very hot 
w T ater. (Preferably also with antiseptic; ask your physician about the anti- 
septic to use.) Wash before every meal in this way, and before cooking, 
serving or eating anything, or putting the fingers in the mouth. 

5. If there are flies about, see that all food and drink is protected from 
them at all times. Flies often carry typhoid poison to foods and drinks. 

6. The poison of typhoid fever does not show itself for two weeks after it 
enters the body. Therefore, for the next two weeks typhoid cases may develop 
from typhoid poison already taken in. But any case which develops on and 
after (a date two weeks later than the date of the placard) will be due 
solely to neglect of this notice and failure to carry out minutely the directions 
here siven. 



MONTHLY if/ BULLETIN 



OF THE 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH 



OF 



MASSACHUSETTS. 



An official publication of the State Board of Health of Massachusetts, issued monthly 
from the office of the Board, 145 State House. Boston, Mass. 



New Series. JULY, 1909. Vol. 4. No. 7. 



Entered at the Post-office at Boston, Feb. 16, 1906, as Secono-class Matter, act 

OF JULT 16, l!>94. 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. 



HENRY P. WALCOTT, M.P., Camrrivce, Chairman. 



JULIAN A. MEAD, M.D., Watektowx. 
HIRAM F. MILLS, C.E., LAWRENCE. 
GERARD C. TOBEY, Esq., AVakeham. 



JAMES W. lU'I.I.. PlTTSFlELO. 

CHARLES K. PORTER, QTONCT. 
ROBERT w. LOVBTT, MP.. BOSTOH. 



MARK W. RICHARDSON, M.P.. Secretary. 



BOSTON: 

WETGHT & POTTEE PEINTING CO.. STATE PK1XTFKS. 

IS Post Office Sqv.vkf. 

1909. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



Page 

Weekly returns of deaths from cities and towns of more than 10,000 population, . 127 

Weekly returns of deaths from certain infectious diseases, 132 

Weekly returns of cases of infectious diseases, 133 

Monthly report on inspection of food and drugs, 134 

Prosecutions for violations of the law relating to food and drugs, .... 135 

List of adulterated foods, etc., for July, 1909, 136 

Inspection of dairies, 138 

The occurrence of infantile paralysis in Massachusetts in 1908 (second paper, with 

maps), hy Rohert W. Lovett, M.D., 139 

An epidemic of infantile paralysis in western Massachusetts in 1908, hy Herhert C. 

Emerson, M.D., 147 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CITIES AND TOWN8 
OF MORE THAN 10,000 POPULATION. 



Week ending July 8, 1909. 











Ho5 


c 

a 

q 


> 

u 

"2 


Death* from — 


CITIES AND TOWNS. 


"£ 


= . 
3 2 




« 


- 
- 






'■S-c 
£ 2 




Vi u 


lid 


-I 


■ 


c 


S fi 


•9 




"5 « 




s ? 

2^ 


ill 


8 ■ 

§5 


jq 




B 


5 




0-, 


M 


a 


£ 


■«s 


£ 


a 


£ 


7. 


Boston, 


624,491 


170 


41 


47 


11 


in 


3 




1 


Worcester, 








136,476 


42 


17 


10 


4 


2 


_ 


_ 




Fall River, 








106,486 


43 


23 


19 


2 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


18 


2 


6 


2 


4 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Lowell, 








96,380 


32 


12 


10 


3 


3 


_ 


_ 


1 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


25 


14 


7 


2 


- 


_ 


_ 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


16 


2 


4 


- 


4 


_ 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


20 


10 


6 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


23 


9 


11 


2 


4 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Somerville, 








76,049 


18 


3 


4 


- 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


7 


2 


3 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


15 


6 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


9 


2 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Newton, 








39,642 


7 


1 


3 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Salem, 








39,019 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


14 


4 


5 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


6 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Quincy, 








31,937 


8 


4 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


14 


2 


4 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


7 


2 


3 


2 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


4 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


4 


2 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


7 





2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


6 


4 














Medford, . 








20,921 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


Beverly, 








16,386 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


5 


- 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


5 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Newhuryport, 








14,834 


7 


2 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


3 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


4 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


5 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough , . 








14,456 


4 


1 














Attleborough , 








13,913 


3 

















Adams, 








13,685 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


2 


2 














Gardner, . 








13,066 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, . 








12,722 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


1 

















Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


3 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


4 





2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


2 


1 














Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


1 


1 














Greenfield, 








10,140 


1 


- 


" 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,327,727 



589 



177 



167 



43 48 



3 



i The populations were estimated upon the rate of growth from WOO to 1905. Those of Taunton, 
Gloucester, North Adams and Clinton were allowed to stand as in 1905, having shown no increase 
during the five-year period. The gain in the population of Lowell is due to the annexation oi a 
part of the town of Tewksbury. The population of Lawrence by the census of 1905 was 70,050. but. 
owing to the building of the new Wood and Arlington mills, an increase of about S.000 is estimated 
by the Lawrence board of health, or 7S.000. 



128 



Week ending July 10, 1909. 





i 


c 


> 




Deaths from — 




«8 


3 


S 








CITIES AND TOWNS. 




■o 

c 


ci 


CD 




£ 


c 

> 






S3*a 


*o 




S3 3 . 


^i 






•afa 








— — 




_a.o w 






a 








g-S 




C as 


C g a 


go 


£ 


"a, 


a. 


OS 






PL| 


K 


a 


£ 


< 




fi 


£ 


s 


Boston, 


1 

624,491 


180 


46 


54 


15 


17 


2 1 


l 


Worcester, 








186,476 


28 


12 


6 


- 


3 


- 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


50 


40 


33 


- 


3 


- 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


23 


7 


9 


4 


3 


- 1 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


24 


6 


4 


1 


_ _ 


- 


- 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


24 


9 


8 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


19 


4 


3 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


19 


10 


11 


1 


- 


- 


- 


l 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


25 


16 


16 


6 


- 


- 


- 


l 


Somerville, 








76,049 


15 


2 


4 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


15 


7 


5 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


19 


11 


10 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


8 


2 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


3 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


6 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


7 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


4 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, . 








34,263 


11 


5 


9 


3 


2 


- 


- 


2 


Everett, 








33,597 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


2 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


7 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


8 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


8 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


4 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


6 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


10 


6 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


3 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


3 


1 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


5 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn , 








14,522 


7 


1 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


1 





1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


9 


3 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


4 


2 


3 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


3 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, 








13,066 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Mil ford, 








12 722 


2 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12^676 


3 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


3 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


_ 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


3 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


• - 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


-' 


- 


- 



Becajritulalion. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,379,468 



593 205 



200 



41 46 



129 



Week ending July 17, 1909. 











"3 a 
§3 


q 

•a 


> 

u 

© 

a 
<*> c 

JS a 

a." 




DEATH! 


li'.'.M 


- 




CITIES AND TOWNS. 


Us 

~ ° a 


h " a 
£3 


V. 


a 

JZ 


- 
> 



o 

A 


3 
S 




Ba 


& 


Q 


S. 


< 


a. 


£ 


H 


m 


Boston, 


624,491 


163 


44 


54 


9 


25 


2 


1 




Worcester, 








136,476 


36 


14 


8 


3 


_ 


_ 




_ 


Fall River, 








106,486 


55 


39 


38 


3 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


18 


2 


4 


- 


2 


_ 


1 


_ 


Lowell, 








96,380 


42 


16 


11 


1 


4 


_ 




_ 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


20 


7 


6 


1 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


17 


4 


4 


_ 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Springfield, 








84,237 


28 


10 


9 


_ 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


35 


21 


20 


3 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Somerville, 








76,049 


9 


3 


3 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


1 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


12 


5 


7 


1 


3 


_ 


_ 




Holyoke, . 








53,590 


22 


10 


8 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Maiden, 








41,941 


14 


5 


5 


_ 


1 


2 


1 


_ 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


16 


7 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Newton, 








39,642 


8 


1 


3 


_ 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


Salem, 








39,019 


18 


7 


5 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


8 


2 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


Everett, 








33,597 


8 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


9 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


5 


- 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


1 


_ 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


3 


_ 


3 


_ 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


2 


_ 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


8 


3 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


North Adams, 








22,150 


9 


5 


4 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Northampton, 








21,075 


5 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


6 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


7 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, . 








16,386 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


Leominster, 








16,030 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Melrose, 








15,459 


5 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


3 


1 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


5 


3 


1 


_ 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


2 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


6 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


3 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, . 








12,722 


5 


2 


3 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


2 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


3 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, . 








11,749 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


5 


— 


- 


~ 


— 


— 


™ 


~ 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,365,783 



652 228 209 26 63 



130 



Week ending July 24, 1909. 





i 


e 


a 












*■ 


■"•■ 


> 




Deaths 


'BOM — 




9e 




u 












!■ i 


to 






u 




CITIES AND TOWNS. 




c 


•o 

c 


"5 


c . 

a *> 




£ 


> 






^•a 


•o 


00 


« 3 . 


^3 


a 




»o &* 


m 








2^ 


— .2 " 

Is « 


g5 


2 

JZ 


£ 


o 

O. 






Pm 


M 


a 


£ 


•« 


ft. 


£ 


H 


S 


Boston, 


624,491 


188 


56 


64 


11 


15 


3 


1 


1 


Worcester, 








136,476 


41 


18 


10 


4 


3 


_ 


_ 


1 


Fall River, 








106,486 


61 


46 


36 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


23 


7 


11 


2 


7 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Lowell, 








96,380 


31 


12 


2 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


New Bedford, . 








85,516 


24 


15 


12 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Lynn,. 








84,623 


18 


7 


2 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Springfield, 








84,237 


28 


15 


11 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


21 


10 


10 


- 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Somerville, 








76,049 


13 


3 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


6 


1 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


23 


12 


9 


1 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


5 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


12 


1 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


- 


_ 


Newton, 








39,642 


4 


- 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Salem, 








39,019 


17 


9 


7 


- 


2 


- 


_ 


_ 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


13 


1 


2 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


- 


Fitchburg, . 








34,263 


7 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


4 


1 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


18 


6 


6 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Waltham, • 








28,761 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


4 


1 


2 


- 


1 


_ 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


6 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


9 


3 


4 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


3 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


14 


12 


4 


2 


1 




- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


4 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


5 


1 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


2 


1 


1 


1 


- 




- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


4 





- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


3 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


5 


3 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


6 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


5 


2 


- 


- 


_ 




_ 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


4 





2 


- 


- 


- 


2 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


3 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Milford, . 








12,722 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Water town, 








12,676 


1 





- 


- 


- 


— 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


4 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


3 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


5 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, • 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington,. 








10,520 


4 


- 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 





~ 


— 


_ 


— 


— 


— 


— 



Total of reporting towns, 



Recapitulation. 



2,365,783 



668 264 



210 



80 



46 



131 









Week ending July 31, 


1909. 














"8 

OS 

Co 


2 

a 

•a 

■S J3 


• 
> 

u 

V 

•a 
a 
s 




Deaths 


FROM — 


CITIES AND TOWNS. 


« s . 

— 3 i 


H 

c 

*\ 

3 


JO 


■i 
1 


- 


«s 








J= a 




<o % 




5 








P 


II 


g£ 




S3 


S 


a 


a 


S 




m 


« 


a 


£ 


< 


£ 


5 


P 


1 


Boston, 


624,491 


202 


80 


78 


12 


14 


2 


5 


3 


Worcester, 








136,476 


41 


15 


14 


2 


4 


_ 


. 


1 


Fall River, 








106,486 


68 


37 


43 


2 


4 


_ 


_ 


1 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


26 


8 


13 


- 


5 


- 


_ 




Lowell, 








96,380 


32 


19 


14 


- 


3 


- 


_ 


_ 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


42 


28 


26 


3 


1 


_ 


1 


_ 


Lynn , 








84,623 


22 


8 


4 


- 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


Springfield, 








84,237 


37 


14 


18 


1 


3 


1 


_ 


_ 


Lawrence, 








78,000 


39 


23 


17 


1 


1 


1 


_ 


1 


Somerville, 








76,049 


12 


1 


4 


1 


1 


2 


_ 




Brockton, . 








65,039 


8 


2 


2 


- 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


37 


21 


22 


3 


2 


_ 


1 


1 


Maiden, 








41,941 


9 


3 


4 


1 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


5 


2 


2 


- 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Newton, 








39,642 


7 


2 


1 


- 


_ 


1 


_ 


_ 


Salem, 








39,019 


16 


10 


6 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Haverhill, 








38,362 


10 


5 


7 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


10 


5 


1 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


Everett, 








33,597 


1 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


Quincy, 








31,937 


8 


2 


3 


- 


2 


- 


_ 


_ 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


14 


6 


6 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


9 


2 


3 


1 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


9 


1 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


2 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


North Adams, 








22,150 


10 


6 


5 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Northampton, 








21,075 


10 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


14 


10 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


Medford, . 








20,921 


5 


- 


2 


- 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


Beverly, . 








16,386 


7 


1 


2 


- 


1 


1 


- 


_ 


Leominster, 








16,030 


6 


2 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


5 


2 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Melrose, 








15,459 


2 





- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


8 


1 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Revere, 








14,820 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


8 


3 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


3 


- 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


1 


_ 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 




_ 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


4 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


4 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


6 


5 


1 


- 


- 


- 


1 


_ 


Clinton, 








13,105 


5 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Milford, . 








12,722 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Water town, 








12,676 


2 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Plymouth. 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


6 


5 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, . 








11,749 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Arlington, 








10,520 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 





— 


_ 


— 


— 


- 


- 


- 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,340,735 775 335 312 31 54 11 



10 



132 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CERTAIN INFECTIOUS 

DISEASES. 



Deaths from Infectious Diseases not specifically mentioned in 
above Tables during the Weeks of July 3, 10, 17, 24 and 31, 1909. 









Week ending — 


DISEASE. 


Place. 


July 3. 


July 10. 


July 17. 


jjuly 24. 


July 31. 


Cerebro-spinal meningitis, . 


Boston, 

Cambridge, 

Everett, 

Fall River, 

Fitchburg, 

Haverhill, 

Lowell, 

Med ford, . 

Worcester, 




1 


1 
1 


1 
1 

1 
1 


2 

_ 


1 
I 

1 
1 


Scarlet fever, 


Adams, 

Boston, 

Fitchburg, 

Lawrence, . 

Newton, 

Springfield, 

Worcester, 




1 

1 

_ 

1 


1 
3 

1 
1 


1 
i 


1 

i 


4 


Whooping cough, . 


Boston , 

Brockton, . 

Everett, 

Haverhill, 

Holyoke, . 

Lowell, 

Worcester, 




1 
1 


1 
1 

2 


1 
1 


2 


1 




Boston, 
Brockton, . 
Holyoke, . 
Newburyport, 
Quincy, 




1 

1 


2 

1 


- 


1 


- 


Tuberculosis other than pul- 
monary. 


Arlington, 
Boston, 

Brockton, . 
Brookline, 
Cambridge, 
Chelsea, 
Chicopee, . 
Haverhill, 
Holyoke, . 
Lawrence, . 

Marlborough, 
North Adams, 




_ 
3 

1 

1 
1 
1 

1 


1 
6 

1 


1 
1 

1 


5 

1 

1 


1 
1 

1 



133 





riace. 


Wkkk WKBTUm— 


DISEASE. 


July 3. 


July 10. 


July 17. 


July 24. 


July 31. 


Tuberculosis other than pul- 
monary — Con. 


Quincy, 
Revere, 
Salem, 
Springfield, 
Taunton, . 


1 


- 


1 

1 


- 


1 

1 


Meningitis other than cere- 
brospinal. 


Attleborough, . 
Lynn 


- 


2 

1 


2 


1 


1 



WEEKLY KETURNS OF CASES OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES. 



Cases of Infectious Diseases reported during the "Weeks of 
July 3, 10, 17, 24 and 31, 1909. 

[Under the provisions of section 52 of chapter 75 of the Revised Laws.] 



Wekk ending — 



July 3. 



July 10. 



July 31. 



Diphtheria, 

Measles, 

Scarlet fever, .... 
Typhoid fever, .... 
Tuberculosis, pulmonary, . 
Cerebro-spinal meningitis, . 
Whooping cough, 

Varicella, 

Erysipelas, 

Mumps, 

Ophthalmia neonatorum, . 
Tuberculosis other than pulmonary, 

Smallpox 

Leprosy, 

Trichinosis, 

Tubercular meningitis, 

Tetanus, 

Trachoma, 

Malignant pustule, 



48 

210 

40 

21 

104 

5 

21 

1 



95 

381 

76 

30 

129 

2 

13 
13 

2 
1 

1 



92 

204 

94 

32 

151 

5 

42 

2 



94 

182 

73 

28 

167 

8 

24 

13 

1 



92 
112 

65 
46 
155 
3 
22 
16 

1 
6 

1 



134 



MONTHLY REPORT ON INSPECTION OF FOOD AND DRUGS. 



The following summary presents the results of the examination of food 
and drugs made by the State Board of Health during the month of 
July, 1909 : — 



Articles examined. 


Number 
found 

to be of 
Good 

Quality. 


Number 

adulterated 

or varying 

from the 

Legal 
Standard. 


Total. 


ARTICLE8 EXAMINED. 


Number 
found 

to be of 
Good 

Quality. 


Number 
adulterated 
or varying 

from the 
Legal 

Standard. 


Total. 


Ale, 

Baking powder, . 

Canned fruit and 

vegetables, 
Cider, . 
Clams, . 
Confectionery, 
Cream, . 

Cream of tartar, . 
Drugs, . 
Extract of vanilla, 
Hamburg steak, . 
Maple syrup, 


1 
1 

2 
1 
1 
1 

12 
1 

39 
1 
2 
1 


1 
3 


1 
1 

2 
2 
1 
1 

12 
1 

42 
1 
2 
1 


Milk, . 

N on-alcoholic 

drinks, 
Olive oil, 
Pickles, 

Salad dressing, . 
Sausages, 
Spice (mace) , 
Table sauce, 
Vinegar, 

Total, . 


353 

3 
9 
3 
1 
1 
1 
3 
12 


176 
6 

3 


529 

3 

15 
3 
1 
1 
1 
3 
15 


449 


189 


638 



The samples of drugs found to be adulterated were olive oil and 
tincture of iodine. 

The cities and towns in which samples were collected were: Auburn, 
Bedford, Beverly, Boston, Billerica, Braintree, Burlington, Cambridge, 
Chelsea, Clinton, Concord, Fitchburg, Gloucester, Great Barrington, 
Harvard, Haverhill, Hingham, Hudson, Hyde Park, Ipswich, Lawrence, 
Lee, Lenox, Lexington, Lincoln, Lowell, Maiden, Millis, Nantucket, New 
Bedford, North Andover, North Attleborough, Northborough, Oak 
Bluffs, Peabody, Pittsfield, Provincetown, Plymouth, Quincy, Salem, 
Somerville, South Framingham, Stockbridge, Sutton, Vineyard Haven, 
"Wakefield, Winchester, and Worcester. 



135 



PROSECUTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW RELATING 
TO FOOD AND DRUGS. 



Sixteen convictions were secured during the month of July, 1909, for 
selling adulterated food and drugs, as follows: — 



No. 


Name of Defendant. 


Place. 


Character of Article sold. 


1 


Paul C. Klein, .... 


Boston, . 


Mercurial ointment (53.6 
per cent. U. S. P.). 1 


2 


William E. Megett, 


Worcester, 


Oleomargarine. 


3 


Roger S. Abbott 


Beverly, . 


Milk (watered ; total solids, 
10.58). 


4 


George P. Becket (driver for 
H. P. Hood & Sons), 








Revere, . 


Milk (watered ; total solids, 








11 20). 


5 


Albert M. Brown, .... 


Harvard, 


Milk (total solids, 11.02). 


6 


Albert M. Brown, .... 


Harvard, 


Milk (watered; total solids, 
10.20). 


7 


Isaac B. Cook, .... 


Lincoln, . 


Milk. 1 


8 


William Fleming, 


Medford, 


Milk (skimmed milk, 3 
cans not marked) . 


9 


William Fleming, 


Medford, 


Milk (total solids, 11.94). 


10 


Albert L. Forbush, 


Braintree, 


Milk. 


11 


John H. Hargrove, 


Lexington, 


Milk. 


12 


Harry Mack, . . ... 


Winch endon, . 


Milk. 


13 


Frank T. Moore, .... 


Peabody, 


Milk (total solids, 10.80) .' 


14 


Frank T. Moore, .... 


Peabody, 


Milk (watered ; total solids, 
11.04).' 


15 


Patrick J. O'Leary, 


Methuen, 


Milk (total solids, 11.37). 


16 


Elliot M. Whitcomb, . 


Winchendon, . 


Milk. 



Fines imposed, $409.70. 



Appealed. 



136 



p 

P 
P 

o 

ft 

6 

P 

03 

P 

o 
o 

ft 
P 

p 
p 
p 
p 
<l 
p 

P 
ft 
P 
ft 
o 
ft 
ft 

a 

M 

ft 
o 

p 
p 

Eh 
<d 
ft 
P 
Eh 
P 
P 
P 
< 

ft 
O 

Eh 

03 



. S i- ;- t. •_ ;_ :_ ;_ 

•w -i. 9 9 S 9 9 a 33 



9 



9 9 



an ^- ^ -M 
. — ~ oo S ~ M ~ 

9 9 « cJ a -» ® Ji< 
o o, 



) •** 9 o 



9 ** fe ** fe ^=3 

Q, ® 9 9 9 a>« 

c: .m _ J* ._ j* -M c -^ « 

- ' B r.; a ri B ^j 9« S j 9 
« -3 iO -* cS r3 -T3 .3 

S «!5 -S sis 



OJJi o •• 



- 9 ... 9 



w 9 w 2 :/. <- 
® ~ 
... 9 ._ 9 



o e o o> 9 o 9 

- gg gg oi bJ - a 

r: — _ -r -c -= -5 
955990® 

"3 "3 "3 "3 '5 '5 '3 



c 5 s 5 3 o o 
o § § « « ° » 



9 



.4-3 ** ^ _ r- — 

4jr^-i9'-9 — & a 

H 9 U~ Z<°. ®o ® 
9 Oj 9 T-t u »-l ^tH 
&,-, &i-H 9 ,_l i-l *-' 
O O 00 - »< -■* x *9 

9 9 9 I Q r 3'Q'T3 Cv) 

.5 .S .3 m '9 w "3 rj5 'S 
5S5'; o" o" o 
ocoo^oa-o 
OOOH H H 



t?s9SftS9at- 

9 a a< 9 9 pj 9 9 

a 9 9 <M o o p. 



! ® 00 ® 

S 3 t- ^ =" 



• S H*= h?J 



9 9 J- 



• 9 » 9 7* 



'J 3 J J 9 O S S 

^ U fa 1.U 

9 2 £ 9 9 9 9 

i/S «- •"" '"fa . 
M 1C ■ 

~. rr 

rt - - 2 ^ 3 2 



onSeQujeOio"" K ,2 J r/: * ■ m 



oS? 2" 9 2 g 2 o So 

m 9 03 9 w 9 9 ro 9 OT 



" I e! 
- S 



h£ h d ti « 



H H H H H H 



' o o o c o o o 
HHHHHHH 



? a 



s" 

■3 S . 

e3 S 

^3 9 
b£> - 

3 cj m 

•5H J c 
a__ ^H o 

' n h „ bjo 

. ^3 a — t 9 
ot>Q 



>02 

a oQ <- 



>a 



«- ;J 9 

o_a ® 

^ §Er a 
02a5dW 



_- « 






•55 O 

a 55 



fe s 



a a 



O o 






2 2 S 

a s l 



M 9 - - = 
S ^ " a fe 



- o q -s -r 



a -d 



6 * to I 



w fe 



S ° J= 



■^ 43 •-" 

«-2 

§ M 2 6 



a o 

9 . 



£ u 

u 9 
08 M 

_= o 
^5i 




— -^ 9 

OO ^ 

> > S if if — " if — * — * if if if ^££ d" ^"d" 

oohs aaaaaaaa asa a ^^ 



■£*- °- 
E c a 



-3 

^^ ot CT) Ci CO 10 

C-} 00 CM t- o 

m ctih •<*< 10 to 



03 03 § 

-H »-< CO 



§ « C30303C30303§ 



C! t- C K5 t- K 

m cc to -* "*< >o 
10 ^S c- 00 00 00 c* 



V.M 



S<C CD 
cS cS ci 
6= fc & 

m ® 05 

ej cS c! 

® s s 
'« 3 « 

a o a 
goo 
5 o « 



fe fc 



05 05^ 

.2.2 s 



05 05 05 CD 05 
+-» «M 4> +3 42 

ej rt rt ct rt 

E= Es: fe= E= E= 

05 05 05 05 05 
T3 ^) T3 "73 ^ 

e! e« « cS e3 

§||SS 

'3 'j 'cj 'S3 "3 

O g O o o 
o g O o o 



oflaaflas^aca 

"a5a50505So55a5O5O5 

goooogogooo 

sh t-4 u< t-» s p ^ ^ 

>-'a5q5O5O5«CQt-ia3o505 

g&A&ei-S? ao5 ftftft 
_r$? <m to SS -, oo & o <M t- 

-J C i SS CD OG CI ri 0O CN rM t- 
CO » w * . • <N . t— • • 

OS rH OO ,h HCOHOlHHH 

m OT ^2 &&&&&&&& 

O O Soooooooo 

c5c3c3c3c3c3^o3cScc!c3 
OOOoOOOOOoO 



5 }zi 



- " c3 



5 * s § a 



XJ . & 



u 

O 


E 




a 


a 


rt 


rf 










> 


3 


8j 


P4 


H 



® w 



■a « a ° 

3 cs .2 » 

V- 1 ..* V- CD 



cs fe; 

H * 

a £ 

fe S 

m ^ 

13 .2 

CO ~- 

5 £ 



ill 






O 1C CC t- 



**% 



JTi KC30000N01S 



138 



INSPECTION OF DAIRIES. 



During the month of July, 1909, 53 dairies were examined in the 
following places : — 



Tlace. 


Number 
examined. 


Number found 1 

to present „ ,, . 
no Objectionable Fer Lent " 
Features. 


Number to 

which Letters 

were sent. 


Per Cent. 


Cheshire, 
Dalton, . 

Second inspection, 
Lanesborough, 

Second inspection, 
Lenox, . 

Second inspection, 
Pittsfield, . 

Second inspection, 




3 

7 
14 

I 

2 
4 
11 


1 

3 

1 
1 

2 


33.33 

42.86 

7.14 

14.29 

18.18 


2 

4 
13 
6 
5 
2 
4 
9 


66.67 

57.14 

92.86 

85.71 

100.00 

100.00 

100.00 

81.82 



Total number of dairies examined, 53 

Number found to be free from objectionable conditions, 8 

Number to which letters were sent, 45 

Total number of conditions to which attention was called 132 

Percentage of dairies which passed inspection, 15.09 

The names of the owners of dairies found to be worthy of commenda- 
tion follow : — 

Cheshire. 
Beers, W. T. 

Dalton. 

Burgner, John A.* Locke, Gotthardt * Wherry, H. H.* 

Lanesborough. 

Baker, L. A.*t Boyington, Win. 

Pittsfield. 

Marshall, M. T * Weller, E.*t 

* Second inspection. t Reported favorably ou first inspection. 



139 



THE OCCURRENCE OF INFANTILE PARALYSIS IN MASSA- 
CHUSETTS IN 1908. 



(SECOND PAPER.') 



By Robert W. Lovett, M.D., Boston. 



[Reported for the Massachusetts State Board of Health.] 

In pursuance of the policy inaugurated in 1907, the State Board of 
Health in 1908 continued the investigation into the occurrence and dis- 
tribution of cases of infantile paralysis in the State of Massachusetts, 
with especial reference to etiology. As in the previous year, circulars 
were sent to all physicians asking them to report to the Board cases 
coming under their observation, and to physicians reporting cases blanks 
were sent to be filled out. From these blanks the following data were 
obtained. 

Physicians seeing such cases were also requested to forward to Dr. 
Theobald Smith, pathologist of the Board, fresh specimens of stools 
from acute cases for bacteriological study, with reference, of course, to 
etiology. It is not possible as yet to state the results of these examina- 
tions. The Board has already started on the investigation of these cases 
for 1909, which will follow much the same lines as those of the two 
previous years, with especial efforts to obtain fresh stools for examination. 
Again the Board desires to express to the medical profession its gratitude 
for the most willing and helpful co-operation. 

The present paper will first present a brief abstract of the literature 
dealing with the epidemiology of the affection appearing since the last 
report (" Boston Medical and Surgical Journal," July 30, 1908), and, 
second, an account of the features of the disease as occurring in the 
State in 1908. The serious epidemic which occurred in 1908 in Franklin 
County will be dealt with separately by Dr. H. C. Emerson, who investi- 
gated it on behalf of the Board. 

Abstract of Important Literature. 

Bacteriology and Experimental Production. — The most valuable 
contribution of the year toward our knowledge of the disease has been 
made by Landsteiner and Popper of Vienna, 2 who have apparently 

1 This article first appeared in the " Boston Medical and Surgical Journal " for July -2-2, 1909. 

2 Zeitschrift fur Immuuitatsforschung und experimentelle Therapie,. 1909, Bd. II. heft 4, teil 1. 



140 

succeeded -in producing the disease in monkeys by inoculation. A boy 
of eight died of the disease on the fourth day. The autopsy showed 
typical anterior poliomyelitis. In the spinal cord and cerebro-spinal 
fluid there were no organisms to be found and cultures were sterile. 
Parts of the spinal cord were then emulsified in salt solution and injected 
into the abdominal cavity of rabbits, guinea pigs, mice and two monkeys. 
In the first three named no paralysis ensued and the spinal cords were 
normal. 

The first monkey became violently ill on the sixth day and died on 
the eighth. He lay on the floor of his cage and his power to move his 
limbs was not investigated. After death changes typical of anterior 
poliomyelitis were found. 

The second monkey was noted to have lost all power in the hind legs 
on the seventeenth day. No paralysis was present on the twelfth, 
although it may have been present before the seventeenth in some degree. 
He was killed on the nineteenth day, and again typical pathological 
changes were found in the central nervous system. 

From the spinal cord of this monkey inoculations were made into 
two other monkeys, with negative results. 

The conclusion of these authors is that " a so-called invisible virus, 
that is, one belonging to the class of the protozoa, is the cause of the 
disease." 

With regard to the affection of domestic animals in epidemics of 
infantile paralysis, this was alluded to in the Eutland epidemic, reported 
by Caverly 1 in 1894 (horses and poultry). Dana investigated a hen 
with paralysis and found the bacteriology negative, and the changes in 
the cord "acute infectious softening rather than myelitis." 2 It was 
noted by Wickman that in the Swedish epidemic of 1903 dogs were 
apparently affected in many instances with the children, but he was not 
convinced of the identity of the two affections. 3 Free reported that pigs 
and chickens were affected in the Michigan epidemic, alluded to below. 
The attention of the State Board of Massachusetts has been called to 
the occurrence of infantile paralysis in a mother and daughter shortly 
after an epidemic of " leg weakness " in the chickens of the household, 
and the matter is under investigation. 

Pasteur, 4 Foullerton and MacCormac investigated the cerebro-spinal 
fluid of a case of poliom} r elitis, finding in it mononuclear round cells. 
On staining, large cocci grouped in pairs and tetrads were found eleven 
days and four weeks after the onset of the disease. Cultures were 

i Wickman: Beitr. z. Kcnntniss der Heine-Medinischen krankh. Berl., 1907. 

2 N. Y. Med. Rcc, Dec. 1, 189-i. 

3 Boston Med. and Surp. Jour., 1895, III., p. 14. 
* Lancet, 1908, vol. I., iSi. 



141 

negative. Nine rabbits were inoculated with the fluid, of which BOme 
were paralyzed after about six weeks and the cord and spinal fluid of 
one of these was again inoculated into other rabbits, with positive results. 
The inoculation from this series was negative. 

Cocci which did not grow were found in the spinal fluid of affected 
animals, but in the one cord examined there were no changes in the 
ganglion cells or about the vessels. The conclusion of these authors, 
that anterior poliomyelitis is not the result of a specific cause, is disputed 
by others on the ground that the experimental paralysis is not anterior 
poliomyelitis (Wickman, Landsteiner and Popper). 

Epidemics Kecently Eeported. 

In Salem, 1 Ya., and vicinity occurred between June 2 and Aug. 10. 
1908, 25 cases; the neighboring city of Eoanoke, seven miles distant, in 
close communication with Salem, escaped with 1 case. The cases all 
occurred in children under six, the youngest being thirteen months old. 
The death-rate was 12 per cent. 

In September, 1908, there occurred " a number of cases " in and about 
Whittemore, la. 2 The following regulation was passed by the State 
Board of Health of Iowa : " It is hereby ordered by the State Board 
of Health that all physicians and osteopaths practicing in Iowa shall 
promptly report to the mayor or township clerk all cases of poliomyelitis 
occurring in their district," etc. 

In central Wisconsin, 3 in the summer of 1908, there occurred an 
epidemic, with 60 cases in one of the smaller cities and 14 deaths. 

In central Pennsylvania the disease was active in the summer of 
1907, 4 100 cases having been seen in and about Dubois, and Sinkler 5 
estimated that in Philadelphia 30 per cent, more cases than usual were 
seen in that summer. Sinkler elsewhere 6 speaks of the etiology as 
follows : " The nature and progress of the disease indicate clearly that 
it is due to an infection. It is obvious, therefore, that the micro-organism 
which produces the infection is one which is developed by hot weather. 
A large proportion of cases have some form of intestinal trouble. ... It 
is probable, therefore, that the micro-organism producing the disease 
has found its entrance into the system through the intestinal tract and 
thence to the spinal cord." 

i Wiley and Darden : Jour. Am. Med. Asso., Feb. 20, 1909, p. 617. 

2 Iowa Health Bull., November, 1908, xxii., No. 5. 

s Informal communication from Wisconsin State Board of Health. 

* Free : Jour. Nerv. and Ment. Dis., April, 1908, p. 259. 

5 Sinkler: Ibid., p. 260. 

e Arch, of Diagnosis, January, 1908, p. 31. 



142 

McCombs 1 contributed a study from the Philadelphia Children's 
Hospital of the disease as observed at that institution between 1903 and 
L907, showing 50 per cent, more cases occurring in the summer of 1907 
than the sum of all cases for the preceding four years. Forty-three 
cases in all were analyzed. 

Man waring 2 reported an epidemic of 30 cases in Flint, Mich., occur- 
ring in the summer of 1908, and alluded to 3 other epidemics in the 
State, one in "Western Michigan, reported by Ostrander, and another 
in Chesaning. 

In the Flint epidemic the average age of affected cases was ten years. 
Of cases under ten all lived, between ten and twenty the mortality was 
25 per cent., over twenty the rate was 75 per cent., corresponding to 
Wickman's observations. 

Griffin 4 described an epidemic of 20 cases in Oceana County, Mich., 
occurring between July and September, 1907. 

Twenty-nine cases were reported by Clowe 5 as having occurred in 
Schenectady in the summer of 1907. There were 2 deaths in adults and 
10 of the cases were seriously sick: 5 were classed as having made a 
complete recovery; 19 cases were less than four years old. 

Partial reports 6 of the New York epidemic of 1907 have already 
appeared in various articles. It seems best to wait for the published 
reports of the committee appointed to investigate the epidemic before 
analyzing the conclusions reached. 

In and about Vienna, in the summer of 1908, between the end of 
July and October, there occurred many cases of infantile paralysis, more, 
according to Zappert, 7 than had been seen since 1S95. He notes the 
large proportion of older children to be affected, and speaks of it as a 
frequent occurrence in large epidemics. 

An epidemic occurred in Victoria. s Australia, in their autumn of 
1908, selecting the months of March to June. It occurred chiefly in 
the most densely populated suburbs of Melbourne. There were 6 deaths 
in 135 cases recorded, and the bacteriological findings are not sufficiently 
clearly given in the abstract, which alone is available, to be commented on. 

i Arch, of Pediatrics, January, 1908, p. 36. 

-• Jour. Mich, State Med. Soo., April, L909. 

i Ibid., February . 

* Wlckman: Studies liber Pollom. Acuta, Berlin, 1905. 

\ Ibany Med. Jour., L908, xxi \., p. 799. 
'i II. W. Berg: N. Y. Med. Rec, 1908, LXXIII., p. 1; Joseph Collins: Tbid., 1907, T.XXII., p. 725; 
Terriberry: Ibid., 1907, LXXIL.p. 920; Jennings: Med. Rev. of Beviews, May, 1908, p. 197; Collins 
and Romelser Jour. Am. Med. Asso., May 80, 1908, p. 1766; Starr: Tbid^ July 11, 1908, p. 112 (with 
pidemics); V. P. Gibney and C. Wallace: Ibid., Dec. 21, 1907, p. 
i Wlen. med. Wochenschr., 1908, Xl.vn.. 
ii D Stephen: Interpol. Med. Jour, of Australasia, November, 1908; Abst, Lancet, April 3, 
191 B, p 



1 i:; 

Byron Bramwell 1 presented an analysis of 'JO cases oba hirn, 

reaching over a period of years. 

One of two inferences is possible from the literature of the Lad 
or so: either the disease is increasing rapidly in this country, or 
attention of the medical profession has been called to the and 

more cases and epidemics have been recognized and reported. 

Cases reported in Massachusetts. 

Occurrence and Distribution. — As against 234 cases of infantile 
paralysis reported in 1907 only 136 cases were reported in 1908. It is 
interesting to note in this connection that, in 1907, 444 cases of cerebro- 
spinal meningitis were reported, while in 1908 there were only 183 cases. 
It was noted in the previous report that the two diseases, however, 
reached their maximum at different seasons. 

In 1907 the cases of infantile paralysis in their distribution in a 
general way corresponded to the density of population in the State, 
grouping themselves as a rule about the centers of densest population, 
and only in and about Pittsflelcl, where some 28 cases occurred, was 
there evidence of anjr marked epidemic. (See map for 1907, following 
p. 146.) 

In 1908, however, the grouping of cases was largely different, and 
bore slight relation to the density of population, and as a rule, where the 
disease was prevalent in 1907 it was rare in 1908, thus corresponding 
to the conclusions reached by Scandinavian investigators, that regions 
severely affected one year were for a while comparatively immune. 
As against 28 cases in the western end of the State in 1907 there were 
only 3 in 1908. In and about Lowell, Fall Eiver and Haverhill there 
were in 1908, as in 1907, apparent slight centers of infection. 

About half (69) of the cases reported in the State occurred in 
Franklin County, the remainder (67) being distributed through the 
State. 

Cerebro-spinal meningitis, however, in the year 190S showed practi- 
cally the same distribution as in 1907, in general being grouped about 
the densest population. These comparisons are made because cerebro- 
spinal meningitis is an infectious disease, apparently mildly contagious. - 
affecting many children, and manifested in the central nervous system. 
Presenting these points of similarity it has been thought that its char- 
acteristics might possibly in the future throw some light on the disease 
under consideration. 

i Scot. Med. and Surg. Jour., Juno, 1908, p. 501. 

- Edler and Huntoon : Jour, of Med. Research, June, 1909. 



Ui 

For purposes of simplicity the epidemic in Franklin County will be 
dealt with separately by Dr. Emerson, and in the following analysis will 
be considered only the cases occurring in the State at large. The two 
analyses taken together will give the occurrence of the disease in the 
whole State. 

The distribution of the 67 cases may be seen in the map for 1908, 
following p. 146. 

Contagion has been so carefully studied in the epidemic that it will 
not be dwelt on here. 

Traumatism. — In 1 case a history of exposure to dampness was given, 
and in 9 cases histories of trauma preceding the disease. These histories, 
however, were in many instances vague and unreliable. 

Season of Onset. — Cases occurred as follows : January, 1 ; February, 
1; March, 1; May, 2; June, 1; July, 9; August, 11; September, 14; 
October, 15; November, 7; date not given, 5. 

The season of onset does not differ materially from that in 1907, but 
does differ essentially from the season of onset in Franklin County, 
where it was as follows : March, 1 ; April, 1 ; June, 6 ; July, 28 ; August, 
26; September, 5; November, 2. 

Age. — The largest number of cases (19) occurred between the ages 
of one and two, and for the years from two to eight there were reported 
from 3 to 8 cases for each age; after this the reported cases were 1 or 
2 a year up to 16. There were 2 adult cases reported, one twenty-one 
and one forty. 

Sex. — There were 39 males, 26 females and 2 not stated. 

As to other factors of possible interest in the etiology, 38 lived in 
detached houses and 27 in tenements, while 2 were not stated. Of the 
cases in tenements, 12 of the patients lived on the first floor, 10 on 
the second, 4 on the third and 1 in the basement. Sanitary conditions 
were described as excellent in 24, good in 20, fair in 16, bad in 5. 

Symptoms. — In 54 cases fever was present, the temperature ranging 
from 100 to 104. In 1 case no fever was present. In 12 cases no record 
given. Brain symptoms occurred in 15 cases. There was usually de- 
lirium during the febrile state. Vomiting is recorded in 21 cases, con- 
stipation in 20 and diarrhoea in 8. Eetraction of the head present in 
10 cases. Pain is recorded in 46 cases, absent in 2. The pain was 
usually along the distribution of the paralysis and did not, as a rule, 
subside at once after the acute attack. Incontinence of urine and feces 
in 2 cases, incontinence of urine in 1, retention and later incontinence 
of urine 1. 



145 



Relation of Beginning of Paralysis to Onset of Fever. 

Paralysis preceded the attack by two days, 1 

Occurred on the same day, 5 

On the next day, 6 

Two days later, 11 

Three days later, 13 

Four days later, 8 

Five days later, 4 

Six days later, 1 

Seven days later, 3 

Eight days later, 1 

Ten days later, . 2 

Two weeks later, 1 

Complete recovery is said to have occurred as follows : — 



Five days from beginning of disease, 
Ten days from beginning of disease, 
Two weeks from beginning of disease, 
Six weeks from beginning of disease, 
Three months from beginning of disease, 



Distribution of Paralysis. 

One leg, 15 

Both legs, 7 

One arm, ............. 8 

One arm and one leg, 11 

One arm and both legs, 5 

Both arms and one leg, 1 

Four extremities, 6 

Not stated, 14 

67 

Mortality. — Four cases terminated fatally, 2 dying of respiratory 
paralysis and 2 of exhaustion, stupor and convulsions. 



CONCLUSION'S. 

The conclusions which would seem warranted by the investigation of 
1908 are as follows: — 

That the disease was less prevalent in the State than in 1907, as was 
also cerebro-spinal meningitis. 



1 1<; 



distribution of cases was unlike that of 1907, localities 

escaping in 1908. That this is quite 

.1. in.,-! identical distribution of cerebro-spinal menin- 

■ ■ 

:t linlf <■• curring in the State were comprised in an 

in Franklin County. 
illv it may be Btated that it is not to be expected that any mat 
will be thrown on the etiology of the disease by its observation 
duri: ir. but it is hoped that by a study of the disease for 

riod "f years in the same territory, conclusions of value may be 
jo to be hoped that by the study of the stools of 
light may be thrown on the etiology. 



AN EPIDEMIC OF INFANTILE PARALYSIS IN WESTERN 
MASSACHUSETTS IN 1908. ' 



ksok, M.D., Springfikld, State Inspector of Health, 
District 14. 



<tigntlon of this epidemic was made at the 
31 ite Board of Health. The information was obtained through the 
■ ■i the physicians, which enabled the writer to visit the homes of Ml the 
Idenilc. The writer spent a month living in the towns in which I 
subsequent visits to these placi s. 

infantile paralysis, or approximately one-half the 
in the State during 1908, occurred in m - 
1 as follows : — 



' 


. 24 


Erving, 


. 


9 


Adams. 


. 


. 8 


Cheshire, . 


. 


7 


Deerfield, . 


. 


5 


Gill, . 


1 . 


4 


North Adams, . 


. 


4 


West Hawley, . 



niOAL Distribution. 

curred in the extreme northwestern port 
ruous towns, viz.. Cheshire (A » isl ! , 
r 3). The remaining I 

red In the " SJ Ileal and Surgical Joan 



t l Vt 



r. 



■^Ji'. 



16 






\ J^^**-**^, 






:>^1^iV£k^ 



^c: t 5 ^' 



i 



w 



-rf'/ 1 



Sei u ti 



irr— ru?1 1 £- 



/ L_- 



^Ch-T^ 



HT— \ 









STATE BOARD OF HEALTH 

MAP OF THE 

STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS. 

Showing 

The Distribution of Infantile Paralysis in 1907 




1 17 

distributed throughout ;i group of eleven neighboring towm in the 

western part of the State, wrath of I tie \ ei i 

involved is a sparselj settled hill country, with numi ams fun. 

ing wiilcr power for \ .- 1 f i o u h manufacturing interests. The eomrnunities 

are largely agricultural, with a considerable factory population in the 

larger towns. Most of the cases occurred in the valley of tl 'eld 

River (Shelbume Efalls-Buckland) and thai of its main 

River (Colrain), and at that point on the Connecticut River (Turners 

Falls), where the Millers and Falls rivers empty into it. As both the 

valleys of the Deerfield and North rivers are very narrow the bulk of 

the population lives oaturally very near these streams. 

Twenty-four cases occurred in Colrain (population 1,£ 
of five villages, containing three cotton mills, in the narrow North River 
valley. Nine of these cases occurred in Griswoldville (population 350), 
the largest of the three mill villages. Seventeen cases occurred in the 
vilhige of Shelhurne Falls, a manufacturing town with a population of 
2,500, which includes the villages of Shelhurne Falls and Buckl 
which are separated by the Deerfield River only. Six cases occurred in 
Turners Falls, a large manufacturing town on the Connecticut River, 
and 2 cases were in other towns across the river. The other eat 
distributed in neighboring small towns. 

Fifty-two of the 6G cases were located in the valley on the- 
while 10 of the remainder were hill cases in country distri 
to these towns. There were 3 scattered cases in Greenfield. The 
tribution of the cases is as follows : — 

On the North River, 23 

Hill eases adjacent 

On the Deerfield River (Shelbume Falls-Buekland) 13 

Hill cases adjacent, 

On the Falls River, 

On the Connecticut River, 

On the Connecticut River canal (Turners Falls) 'J 

On the Millers River, 

Hill case adjacent, 

On the Deerfield River (Deerfield) 1 

The actual distance from the houses where the eases occurred to 
streams above mentioned, including millponds, canals etc, was found 
to be as follows: 4 cases were one-quarter of a mile distant; 15 cases 
were one-eighth of a mile distant ; 33 cases were less than 
distant, of which 20 cases were from 10 to COO feet distant. 

The rela+ion of the hill eases to those in the valley was noted, and in 



148 

every case it was found that the hill cases gave a history of visiting, 
driving or in some way spending time in the nearby towns, which were 
upon the streams, as above mentioned. A trolley line runs through the 
North Kiver valley connecting Colrain and Shelburne Falls, and there 
is also trolley connection between Greenfield, Turners Falls and Millers 
Falls. Transportation for the hill cases to the river towns was by wagon 
only. It may be stated that there was no case in the 66 under considera- 
tion which had not been exposed recently to the valley influences, if any. 
In addition to the above 69 cases in western Massachusetts, 6 cases of 
infantile paralysis occurred in southern Vermont in territory contiguous 
to the Colrain district. They all appeared to be independent cases, and 
4 of them were located near the Deerfield Eiver or its branches. 

Sequence of Cases. 

Sixty- five of the cases occurred in the summer months, as follows: 
June, 6 ; July, 28 ; August, 26 ; September, 5 ; while isolated cases 
occurred in March, 1 ; April, 1 ; and in November, 2. The height of 
the outbreak appears to have been July 25, on which date 6 cases occurred 
in 4 towns, as follows: Bernardston, 2 (one family); Buckland, 2; 
Shelburne Falls, 1 ; Colrain, 1. The early cases occurred at various 
points throughout the district concerned, as follows : in Turners Falls 
district June 4 (the earliest case), in the Shelburne Falls district June 
20, in the Colrain district July 1 (in the southern part of this terri- 
tory) and July 4 (in the northerly part of this section). 

The following table shows the sequence of cases as to time of onset : — 



Date. 



Town. 



Case 
Number. 



March 25. 

April 1 

June 4 

June 9 

June 13 

June 17 

June 20 

June 27 
July 
July 
July 
July 
July 
Julv 
July 

July n 

July 16, 

July 16, 

July 17, 

July 18, 

July 19, 

July 20, 

July 20, 

July 20, 



Heath, .... 

Heath 

Montague (Turners Falls), 

Montague (Turners Falls), 

Montague (Turners Falls), 

Greenfield, 

Shelburne, 

Shelburne, 

Colrain (Shattuckville), 

Montague (Turners Falls), 

Colrain (Willis Place), . 

Gill 

Montague, 

Colrain (Frankton), 

Greenfield, 

Colrain (Griswoldville), 

Colrain (Frankton), 

Colrain (Shattuckville), 

Colrain (Shattuckville), 

Colrain (Griswoldville), 

Colrain (Griswoldville), 

Shelburne Falls, . 

Montague, 

Colrain (Griswoldville), 



39x 
39 

1 

o 

3 
11 
26 
27 
45 

4 
60 
10 

5 
40 
IS 
49 
41 
43 
44 
50 
53 
25 

6 
51 



149 



Date. 


Town. 


Cane 
Bfamber. 


July 33, 


Colrain, 


88 


July 23, 


Bernardston, 






















17 


July 24, 


Auckland, 






















29 


July 25, 


Shelburne Falls, . 






















23 


July 25, 


Buekland, 






















:;•. 


July 25, 


Colrain (Frankton), 






















42 


July 25, 


Buekland, 






















86 


July 25, 


Bernardston, . 






















15 


July 25, 


Bernardston, . 






















16 


July 27, 


Colrain (Griswoldville), 






















54 


July 29, 


Colrain (Willis Place), . 






















59 


July 29, 


Shellmrne Falls, 






















22 


Aug. 2, 


Colrain (Griswoldville), 






















56 


Aug. 3, 


Colrain (Shattuckville), 






















47 


Aug. 3, 


Colrain (Shattuckville), 






















46 


Aug. 5, 


Colrain (Griswoldville), 






















48 


Aug. 7, 


Greenfield, 






















14 


Aug. 7, 


Cheshire, 






















64 


Aug. 7, 


Colrain (Lyonsville), . 






















61 


Aug. 8, 


Buekland, 






















28 


Aug. 9, 


Greenfield, 






















12 


Aug. 11, 


Bernardston, 






















18 


Aug. 11, 


West Hawley, 






















67 


Aug. 12, 


Colrain (Griswoldville), 






















57 


Aug. 12, 


Montague, . . . 






















7 


Aug. 12, 


Buekland, 






















30 


Aug. 15, 


Buekland, 






















35 


Alls. 16, 


Adams, .... 






















66 


Aug. 18, 


Erving (Millers Falls), 






















8 


Aug. 22, 


Shelburne Falls, . 






















24 


Aug. 23, 


Heath 






















37 


Aug. 23, 


Shelburne Falls, 






















21 


Aug. 23, 


Shelburne Falls, . 






















20 


Aug. 23, 


Colrain (Willis Place), 






















58 


A ug. 24, 


Colrain (Adamsville), . 






















62 


Aug-. 24, 


Colrain (Griswoldville), 






















55 


A ug. 27, 


Colrain (Griswoldville), 






















52 


Aug. 29, 


Buekland, 






















31 


Sept. 4, 


Bernardston, . 






















19 


Sept. 8, 


Deerfield, 






















14x 


Sept. 23, 


Buekland, 






















33 


Sept. 25, 


Buekland, 






















34 


Sept. 29, 


Heath 






















38 


Nov. 3, 


North Adams, 






















65 


Nov. 6, 


Erving (Millers Falls), 






















9 



Prom this table it appears that the outbreak in the various towns, 
with the exception of a few small groups, was not an explosive one, but 
cases occurred from time to time, covering a period of from six to 
eight weeks in each town. The sequence of cases in groups is shown 
in detail under " Contact and Eelation of Cases." 



Contact and Eelation of Cases to Each Other, taken up by 

Groups. 

Turners Falls Village. — The first cases out of the whole number 
occurred in Turners Falls Village on June 4, 9 and 13. These cases 
came down five days apart, and it is probable that there was indirect 
contact between the three families, although the contact between these 
3 cases was very slight, if any. Case No. 1, June 4, was near the middle 
of a thirty-tenement block, and was the only case in the block or on 



150 

the street. Case No. 2, June 9, was on the next street, in a four-tene- 
ment house, while Case No. 3, June 13, was in the middle of a thirty- 
tenement block next to the tenement house just mentioned. Case No. 
1 was certainly an independent case, and probably case No. 3, while 
case No. 2 may not have seen case No. 1. 

Independent case, 1. Contact cases, 2. 

Turners Falls Suburbs. — Cases No. 11, June 17, No. 4, July 2, No. 
10, July 5, and No. 5, July 6, were all independent cases, and were 
scattered in the suburbs of the village of Turners Palls, 3 being in 
Turners Falls, 1 in Greenfield and 1 in Gill, all within a mile and 
a half circle. Case No. 6, July 20, was a cousin of case No. 5, and 
lived on the second floor of the same tenement. These families were 
intimate, but as the children were five and eight months old, respectively, 
they were kept in their carriages, and there was no intimate contact 
between them. 

Independent cases, 4. Contact case, 1. 

Greenfield-Deerfield. — Case No. 13, July 9, No. 14, August 7, and 
No. 12, August 9, were all independent cases in Greenfield, one-half to 
one mile apart. No. 14x, September 8, was also an independent case, 
living in Deerfield. 

Independent cases, 4. 

Bernardston. — Two cases occurred at the same time in one family, 
Nos. 15 and 16, July 25. At the same time an older brother of nineteen, 
case No. 17, came home from logging with a headache, and went to 
bed and was supposed to have typhoid fever. His history and the atrophy 
of muscles in his right hand showed that he had infantile paralysis. A 
mile above this house was case No. 18, August 11. Three weeks later, 
September 4, a brother, case No. 19, was taken ill, having been, of 
course, in close contact with case No. 18. 

Independent cases, 4. Contact case, 1. 

Shelburne Falls. — The first case, No. 26, in this group was a primary 
case, and occurred June 20 on a mountain farm four miles from Shel- 
burne Falls. There was intimate contact with a brother of fourteen 
and a sister of two, but not with a brother of twenty-two, who was work- 
ing hard haying. Seven days later, however, he was taken sick, case 
No. 27, June 27. Cases No. 25, July 20, No. 23, July 25, No. 22, 
July 29, and No. 20 and No. 21, taken ill on the same day, August 
23, were all independent cases. No. 20 and No. 21 had been more or 
less intimate up to the time of illness. Case No. 24, taken sick August 
22, was visiting in Shelburne Falls and went daily across the river to 
a cousin in Buckland who was sick, case No. 36. 

Independent cases, 6. Contact cases, 2. 



151 

Buchland. — Case No. 29, July 24, living on a mountain two miles 
from the village, was an independent case, as were cases No. 32, July 
25, No. 36, July 25, No. 30, August 12, No. 31, August 29, and 
33, September 23, living in the village. Within a day or two of the 
onset of case No. 33, his brother, case No. 34, was taken sick. As the 
history was difficult to get it cannot be stated whether his illness was 
coincident or a day or two later. Case No. 28, August 8, had been in 
contact with case No. 36, living two doors above, and was taken sick 
two weeks later. 

Independent cases, 6. Contact cases, 2. 

Colrain. — This town lies about one mile above Shelburne Falls and 
consists, as previously stated, of five villages : Frankton, Shattuckville, 
Griswoldville, Willis Place and Colrain City in the narrow North River 
valley. The largest number of cases was in the middle settlement, 
Griswoldville, and there were none in the settlement farthest north, 
Colrain City. 

Frankton. — The Frankton group, consisting of three cases, Nos. 40, 
41 and 42, had their first symptoms nine days apart, July 7, 16 and 
25. These cases lived in three houses, about seventy-five feet apart. 
The first case, No. 40, was independent. No. 41, a child of two, had 
been carried by its mother when she went to inquire for No. 40, but there 
was no intimate connection between the children. There was an indefinite 
history of commingling of all the children, and No. 43 may have been 
in the house of No. 42 while she was ill. No. 43 was, however, recover- 
ing from a severe burn, and it is not probable that she was with the 
other cases while she was sick. 

Independent case, 1. Contact cases, 2. 

Shattuckville. — About one mile above Frankton occurred 6 cases 2 
of which, No. 43 and No. 44, were in one family and were coincident, 
July 16 and 17. Two others, No. 46 and No. 47, were coincident cases 
in another family, August 3. No. 45, July 1, was an independent case, 
as was No. 48, taken ill August 5. 

Independent cases, 6. 

Griswoldville. — From one-half to a mile above Shattuckville is the 
village of Griswoldville, consisting of one street in a very narrow valley. 
Nine cases occurred here, of which No. 49, July 11, No. 50, July 18, 
No. 53, July 19, No. 54, July 27, No. 56, August 2, No. 55, August 
24, and No. 52, August 27, were probably independent cases, there being 
no history of contact of these children with each other while ill. Case 
No. 51 had played a little with case No. 50, but had not seen her after 
she, No. 50, was taken sick, and she may be considered an independent 
case, being a member of the family of the owner of the mills and know- 



152 

ing none of these other children. Case No. 57, however, a girl of six- 
teen, had been taking care of case No. 56, her sister of six, and was 
taken sick ten days after her younger sister. 

Independent cases, 8. Contact case, 1. 

Willis Place. — About a mile above Griswoldville is a large twenty- 
seven-tenement block. At one end of this block case No. 60 was taken 
sick July 29 and case No. 58 at the other end of the block August 23. 
There was no visiting between these families after the first case was 
taken sick and they appear to be independent cases. 

Independent cases, 3. 

The 54 cases just reviewed constitute what may be called the group 
cases, of which 43 are independent and 11 are possible contact cases, — 
7 of which are of known and 4 of possible contact. The 15 remaining 
cases are all independent, 9 of which are connected by location with the 
groups above mentioned and 6 are isolated. 

Independent Cases. 

Group, 43 

Connected with the group, 9 

Isolated, 6 

— 58 

Contact Cases. 

Known, . . .7 

Possible, 4 

— 11 

Total, 69 

Two cases in same family, coincident, 3 

Three cases in same family, coincident, 1 

Two cases in same family, not coincident, 4 

Time Interval. 

The time interval elapsing between the exposure and onset of symp- 
toms of the 7 cases of known contact is as follows: 3 cases of intimate 
contact with intervals of twenty-four days, fourteen days and eight days ; 
4 cases of contact not intimate, fourteen days, nine days (two instances) 
and seven days. In the 4 cases of probable contact the history is too 
indefinite to make it worth while to estimate this time interval. 

i One of these consisted of two families, married sisters, living on the first and second floors of 
same house. 



153 



Evidence of Contagion. 

The following are the facts in relation to the 7 cases of known con- 
tact: case No. 6 was a female infant of five months, one of three children 
living in an upper tenement. She was taken ill fourteen days after her 
cousin, a female infant of eight months, was attacked who lived on the 
first floor of the same house. It is known that the infants were in the 
same room during the illness of the one first affected, but they were not 
in the same carriage or together on the same bed. Case No. 19 was a 
ten-year-old brother of case No. 18, and was taken sick twenty-four days 
later. There was no isolation, and two boys in the family were more or 
less intimate with the sick one. Case No. 24 shows the most intimate 
contact of any. She was a fifteen-year-old girl, and came to see her 
cousin, a boy of two, every day. She took care of him, sat by him and 
kissed him. Her first visit to him was three weeks after he was taken 
sick, when the acute symptoms had disappeared. Her first symptoms 
began eight days after she had first seen him. Case No. 27 was a strong 
farmer lad twenty-two years old. He was taken sick one week after his 
brother of four years. This boy was kept in the living rooms, and was 
intimate with two small children, but there was no intimate contact 
between him and the older brother, as he was very busy haying. Case 
No. 28, a girl of ten, lived two doors from case No. 36, a child of two 
years, and was a frequent visitor to this child, but she did not kiss him. 
Her first symptoms began fourteen days after the onset of symptoms in 
the little boy. Case No. 41 had been taken in its mother's arms when 
she went to inquire for the first case in this group, case No. 40, and may 
have been in the house several times, but there was no very intimate 
contact between them. She showed signs of the disease nine days after 
the onset of case No. 40. Case No. -57 was a girl of sixteen who had 
been taking care of her sister, No. 56, and had been sleeping with her 
throughout her illness. Her first symptoms were ten days after the onset 
of the first case in the family. 

Evidence oe Noncontagion. 

Out of the whole number of cases there were but 2 that were isolated 
during their illness. One was in a family in which there were no other 
children and 1 was in a house in which there were three children, and 
this case was as thoroughly isolated as if it were a case of scarlet fever. 
The remaining 67 cases were not isolated in any degree, except that in 
a few instances the serious illness of the child was a sufficient bar to any 
intimate contact with the other children in the familv. 



154 

Careful inquiry into the conditions that obtained during the illness 
of the 67 in which there was no isolation shows that there were 166 
children in these families, 4 of which later had the disease; that there 
were 4 instances in which the sick child slept with a brother or sister 
up to the time of illness, 7 during the first few days of illness and 5 
throughout the entire illness; that there were 9 instances in which the 
other children of the family drank from the same cup; that there were 
12 instances in which the children in the family and neighbors' children 
kissed the sick child during the acute illness. It is impossible to de- 
termine the number of times that contact of the kind just mentioned 
occurred, but the above detail indicates to how great an extent the in- 
timacy of the well with the sick did occur. Out of the entire number 
involved in the intimate contact just described 2 cases developed the 
disease. 

Investigation further showed that there were, in addition to the 166 
exposed children in the families, 86 children among neighbors and friends 
(making a total of 252 children) who were in intimate contact with the 
67 cases. By intimate contact is meant (and this appeared to be almost 
universal) as free intercourse of the well and the sick as the patient's 
condition would permit. Playing with the child, sitting beside him and 
taking naps lying on the lounge or bed with him were the conditions 
that existed in almost every case. The total number of children that 
were more or less intimately exposed to the 67 cases is probably at least 
twice or three times the number of known exposures. 

Diet. 

Investigation of the diet showed the following : general diet, 58 ; cow's 
milk exclusively, 4 ; breast milk and cow's milk, 3 ; breast milk and fruit, 
etc., 4. Milk was found to be used in considerable quantities by 29 
cases, in small amounts by 26, while 3 cases used no milk at all. Nine- 
teen families produced their own milk, and there were twenty-two milk- 
men serving thirty-six families, while the milk for the remainder of the 
cases was brought from various sources. None of the infants under one 
year of age were fed upon breast milk alone. 

Unusual Diet. 

It was not found possible to get a more detailed history of the diet 
than is given above, except that in 6 cases it was especially mentioned 
that fruit and berries had been a very large item of diet. In the 2 
infants, five and eight months old, bananas and berries were given as 
the diet in addition to breast milk. In 1 case the illness was attributed 






155 

to eating heartily of English mulberries, and in 3 cases to the eating of 
large amounts of blackberries and blueberries. In 39 instances it was 
stated that food supplies were bought from pedlers, and it was found 
that these carts frequently served the town and country districts in their 
localities. 

Preceding Illness. 

Practically all the cases had been in good health previous to this attack. 
One child was in very feeble health, 5 were in a more or less run-down 
condition and 63 were in their usual condition, or good health. (One 
had recovered two months before from a slight attack of scarlet fever.) 

Conditions Immediately preceding Onset. 

Traumatism. — There were 3 cases of traumatism as follows : fall 
from bicycle three weeks before illness; fall from piazza four weeks 
before illness; burn of arm and chest three weeks before illness. There 
were no special symptoms subsequent to the two falls, and the burn was 
healing properly when infantile paralysis developed. 

Overheating. — Five cases gave a history of possible overheating within 
a day or two of the onset of the disease. 

Fatigue. — Four cases were noted as suffering from marked fatigue 
within a day or two of this illness. One was a child of seven, who had 
been carrying bricks up a ladder the day before he was taken ill ; another 
was a young man of eighteen who was a noted athlete ; a third had been 
lifting very heavy weights, and a fourth was tired out with school work. 

Swimming. — Five cases had been in swimming in the streams near 
by and 6 cases, among children, had been plajdng in the brooks, 
ponds, etc. 

One child had a severe cold just before the symptoms of this disease 
appeared. It was noted in one case, in a young man of nineteen years 
old, that he had been extremely nervous and very much worried for fear 
he would develop this disease, as he had recently attended a funeral of 
a classmate who died from infantile paralysis. 

Abortive Cases. 1 

There were 6 cases reported which on investigation were found to 
have the same acute symptoms as the other cases, but to a less degree, 
and no paralysis occurred. The history of these cases seemed to eliminate 
the possibility of their being simple gastro-intestinal disturbances; and 
while the diagnosis of infantile paralysis cannot be proven, the history 

i This type of the disease is recognized and described by Wickman. 



156 

of the cases seemed to warrant their being considered as abortive cases 
of this disease. One case occurred in a family more than three weeks 
after the onset of a rather severe case in another brother. One case was 
coincident (doubtful history) with that of an older brother, while 4 
cases occurred without known exposure. 

Symptoms Accompanying Attack. 

Pain, more or less marked, 62 cases; pain, little or none, 7 cases; 
fever, 63 cases; constipation, 47 cases; diarrhoea, 2 cases; nausea and 
vomiting, 43 cases; retraction of head, 35 cases; retention of urine, 23 
cases; incontinence of urine, 1 case; brain symptoms, 13 cases; stiffness 
of neck, 6 cases; stiffness of spine, 7 cases. 

Onset. 

The onset in 65 cases was sudden and in 4 cases it was delayed, 
extending over several days. 

Complicating Symptoms. 

In 1 case a marked urticaria was an initial symptom; in 2 cases 
intense pain in the stomach was noted, also, as an initial symptom; in 

5 cases a complicating tonsilitis was present ; in 1 case a severe nose bleed 
took place; an extremely offensive breath was noted once; double vision 
occurred once as did also marked disturbance of speech. The early 
symptoms in 1 case were thought to be due to swollen glands, which 
had been present for a year, and in another case to a rheumatic condition. 
In 2 cases stumbling of the child while walking and playing was one of 
the first symptoms noted. 

Diagnoses made. 

In 1 case no diagnosis whatever was made; in 2 cases a diagnosis of 
typhoid fever was made, and the following diagnoses of single cases: 
digestive disturbance, heat stroke, cerebro-spinal meningitis, rheumatism. 

Eecovery. 

Excluding the 6 abortive cases, 58 cases were examined in this regard 
about nine months after the illness. Six cases appeared to have com- 
pletely recovered from the paralysis. Six others appeared to have re- 
covered, but of these, 5 were infants and could not be satisfactorily 
examined, while the other was sick at the time of examination. These 

6 cases were classed as apparent recovery. Forty-two cases had partially 
recovered from paralysis, while 4 cases had shown but very slight im- 
provement since the attack. 



157 



Deaths. 

There were 5 fatal cases, 1 of which made a partial recovery and died 
two months later of broncho-pneumonia. The length of the illness in 
days was as follows : female, eight months, 65 (broncho-pneumonia) ; 
male, three years, 6; female, four years, 4; female, fifteen years, 5; 
male, nineteen years, 6. 

Age and Sex. 

Forty-two were males and 27 were females. This epidemic was char- 
acterized by the number of cases in middle and late childhood and young 
adult life. It will be noticed that there were 6 cases over seventeen 
years of age, all in males. The following table shows the age and sex 
of each case : — 



Females. 



Under one year, 
One year, 
Two years, 
Three years, . 
Four years, 
Five years, 
Six years, 
Seven years, . 
Eight years, . 
Nine years, 
Ten years, 
Twelve years, 
Thirteen years, 
Fourteen years, 
Fifteen years, 
Sixteen years, 
Seventeen years, 
Eighteen years, 
Nineteen years, 
Twenty years, 
Twenty-one years, 
Twenty -two years, 
Twenty-five years, 



Totals, 



Nativity. 
The following data were obtained : — 



Nativity. 





Massachusetts. 


United States. 


Foreign. 


Not obtained. 


Father, .... 
Mother 


29 
29 


41 
44 


14 
17 


14 
8 





158 











Number oj 


" Birth. 


















1st. 


2d. 


3d. 


4th. 


5th. 


6th. 7th. 


8th. 


10th. 


11th. 


Not obtained. 


Cases, 


14 


13 


16 


3 


7 


4 


2 


1 


1 


1 


7 




Interval 


of Time to Previous Confinement, in Years. 






l 


2 


3 


4 


5 


6 


7 


10 




13 18 


7 


3 


1 


2 


2 


2 



Distribution of Paralysis. 

With the exception of the 6 abortive cases which showed no paralysis, 
the distribution of the paralysis was as follows : — 



General, 3 

Neck and back, 1 

Right forearm, ............ 1 

Right arm, 4 

Left arm, ............. 2 

Both arms and legs, neck and back, 1 

Both arms, back, chest and throat, 1 

Right arm and right leg, 3 

Right arm and left leg, 2 

Left arm and left leg, . . . 2 

Left arm, left thigh and leg, 1 

Right arm, right thigh and leg, 1 

Left arm and right upper arm, 1 

Right leg, .2 

Left leg, 2 

Both legs, 11 

Both legs and left arm, .......... 2 

Both legs, left arm and back, 1 

Both legs and back, 1 

Both legs, left arm and neck, 2 

Both legs, neck and back, ......... 1 

Both legs and thighs, 8 

Both legs, left face and left arm, 1 

Left leg and thigh, 5 

Right leg and thigh, 2 

Right leg and thigh and left face, 



159 



School. 

As the outbreak occurred in July and August there were no results 
that could be attributed to school influences and but 3 of the children 
attended school. 

Weathee. 

A study of the plotted curves of temperature, rainfall (secured from 
the report of the Hatch Experiment Station at Amherst) and the number 
of cases appears to show no correlation whatever. 

Local Conditions. 

Investigation of the home conditions of each case shows that the sani- 
tary conditions were found to be excellent in 4 cases, good in 17, fair 
in 31 and bad in 17. 

Forty-one of the cases lived in detached houses, 17 in two-tenement 
and three in three-tenement houses, while but 8 lived in houses having 
four or more tenements. 

The elevation of the dwelling was noted as high in 28 cases, as 
medium in 22 and low in 19. 

Forty-two of the houses were considered to be dry, while 27 were 
noted as being in a more or less damp location. There were cellars 
in all of the houses, 42 of which were dry and 23 were damp, while 4 
were found to be very damp or wet. 

The water supply was given as spring water in 53, as the town supply 
in 14 and from wells in but 2 cases. 

The sanitary arrangements in the houses showed that 23 houses had 
water-closets connected with the sewer and 46 had earth closets; that 
the sink water from 30 houses was carried into the sewer and in 39 cases 
it was disposed of in various ways on the land near by or in pipes to the 
nearest brook, pond, etc. 

Screens were found to be used in 65 cases and not used in but 4 cases. 
Inquiry into the question of flies and mosquitoes showed that flies were 
said to be numerous in 28 instances, few in 39 and not present in 2; 
that mosquitoes were said to be numerous in 22 instances, few in 44 and 
not present in 2. No history of insect bites at the time of illness was 
obtained. 

Summary. 

"We are dealing with groups of cases of an acute disease attacking 
children chiefly, but youth and adults frequently up to the age of twenty- 
five years, among the inhabitants of river valleys in sparsely settled com- 



160 

munities, occurring during the summer months of a hot. dry season. 
The persons attacked lived chiefly in detached houses, and but 8 lived 
in houses or blocks of more than three tenements. Although the cause 
of the disease is not known, it can undoubtedly be classed as infectious, 
as its distribution and incidence in localities are similar to those of other 
infectious diseases and strongly suggest a common cause. 

Ninety per cent, of the persons attacked were in good health, and 
while a few instances of traumatism, overheating, fatigue and swimming 
were noted previous to the onset, the history of these cases does not seem 
to warrant the placing of much etiological responsibility upon these 
occurrences. They were not different from what might be found in the 
history of almost any groups of persons at this season. 

"With regard to the contagiousness of the disease the investigation of 
this group of cases suggests that the disease is but mildly contagious, 
to say the most. A large number of children were in intimate contact 
with those who were sick, and of these children an insignificant minority 
developed the disease. Although the group of cases investigated is a 
small one from which to draw generalizations, it must be remembered 
that the circumstances were particularly favorable to the investigation 
of points of contact between sick and well and of the detection of con- 
tagion. 

The sanitary conditions under which most of the cases lived were 
not good. Dampness prevailed in many locations and most of the houses 
were very near water, but it must be remembered that the outbreak was 
in the valleys. Most of the houses had no sewer connection. 

The marked digestive disturbances, which were early and notable 
symptoms, suggest the stomach as the port of entry for the infection. 
It does not seem possible in this outbreak to blame the varied sources of 
milk or water supply as carriers of the infection, unless it be considered 
that the cause of the disease may be present in all milk or in all water. 
That the cause may be connected with the food seems possible. It is 
important to note that none of the 7 infants under one year of age were 
fed exclusively upon breast milk. 

The facts that all the cases living on the hill farms had been in the 
valley towns recently, where the infection may have occurred, and that 
many families purchased some of their food supplies from pedlers' carts, 
which act as the go-between between the town and the country, may be 
noteworthy. 

It is not known what influences the dry season, with its low water and 
the proximity of many houses to water, contributes, but these facts appear 
to be significant. 



161 



Conclusions. 

From an intimate acquaintance with all the facts and conditions of 
this outbreak we conclude that : — 

1. Infantile paralysis is a disease produced by some external agent, — 
that is, it is an infectious disease. 

2. It is mildly contagious at the most. 

3. The harmful agent appears to enter the digestive tract in most 
instances. 

4. Until the organism causing the disease is known, it will be impos- 
sible to say whether the infection is carried directly to the patient or 
by means of food. 




MONTHLY LBi BULLETIN 



OF THE 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH 



OF 



MASSACHUSETTS. 



An official publication of the State Board of Health of Massachusetts, issued monthly 
from the office of the Board, 145 State House, Boston, Mass. 



New Series. AUGUST, 1909. Vol. 4. No. 8. 



Entered at the Post-office at Boston, Feb. 15, 1906, as Second-class Matter. Act 

or July 16, 1894. 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. 



HENRY P. WALCOTT, M.D., CAMBRIDGE, Chairman. 



JULIAN A. MEAD, M.D., Watertown. 
HIRAM P. MILLS, C.E., LAWRENCE. 
GERARD C. TOBEY, Esq., Wareham. 



JAMES W. HULL, PlTTSFIELD. 
CHARLES H. PORTER, QuiNCY. 
ROBERT W. LOVETT, M.D., Boston. 



MARK W. RICHARDSON, M.D., Secretary. 



BOSTON: 

WEIGHT & POTTEE PEINTING- CO., STATE PEINTEES, 

18 Post Office Square. 

1909. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



Weekly returns of deaths from cities and towns of more than 10,000 population, 

Weekly returns of deaths from certain infectious diseases, 

Weekly returns of cases of infectious diseases, . 

Monthly report on inspection of food and drugs, 

Prosecutions for violations of the law relating to food and drugs 

List of adulterated foods, etc., for August, 1909, 

Inspection of dairies, 

The harmful effects of acetanilid, antipyrin and phenacetin, 
The commercial pasteurization of milk, .... 



Paor 
165 
169 
170 
170 
171 
172 
174 
175 
177 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CITIES AND TOWNS 
OF MORE THAN 10,000 POPULATION. 



Week ending Aug. 7, 1909. 



Recapitulation. 





53 


B 


> 




Death* 


PROM — 




% 


08 










' jj 


be 






,• 




CITIES AND TOWNS. 


gjj 


ft 


"3 


~z. 


3 •» 




« 


gj 






3 ■O 

~5 3 

g-a 

o M 


T3 






§3 


m 

xz 


B 




"H. 


m 




Bu 


53 


ft 


X 


< 




— 


Q 


a 


Boston, 


624,491 


194 


77 


77 


8 


16 


2 


1 




Worcester, 








136,476 


49 


18 


10 


2 


1 


_ 




_ 


Fall River, 








106,486 


44 


34 


30 


3 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


21 


8 


9 


3 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Lowell, 








96,380 


37 


16 


9 


1 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


49 


34 


26 


1 


2 




1 


_ 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


27 


13 


10 


_ 


2 


1 




_ 


Springfield, 








84,237 


21 


8 


11 


3 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


29 


21 


22 


1 


3 


_ 


_ 


2 


Sonierville, 








76,049 


16 


7 


6 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 




Brockton, . 








55,039 


9 


3 


4 


_ 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


25 


11 


11 


1 


1 


_ 


1 


_ 


Maiden, 








41,941 


8 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


15 


6 


1 


_ 


_ 


1 


_ 


_ 


Newton, 








39,642 


6 


- 


1 


_ 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Salem, 








39,019 


16 


8 


6 


_ 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


14 


6 


5 


1 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


11 


7 


3 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Everett, 








33,597 


2 


2 














Quincy, 








31,937 


6 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


16 


5 


9 


1 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


10 


1 


4 


_ 


4 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


8 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Brookline, . 








26,674 





_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


10 


4 














North Adams, 








22,150 


6 


5 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Northampton, 








21,075 


3 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Chicopee, . 








21.049 


10 


8 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Medford, . 








20,921 


3 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 




_ 


Beverly, 








16,386 


6 


4 


3 


- 


_ 


_ 




_ 


Leominster, 








16,030 


8 


5 


4 


_ 


_ 


_ 




_ 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


3 


1 














Melrose, 








15,459 


2 

















Newburyport, 








14,834 


4 


- 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


7 


4 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 




_ 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


6 


4 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 




_ 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


1 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 




_ 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


Marlborough , . 








14,456 


5 


2 


2 


- 


_ 


_ 




_ 


A ttleborough , 








13,913 


6 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


4 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Clinton, 








13,105 


3 


- 


1 


_ 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


2 

















Milford, . 








12,722 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Watertown, 








12,676 


1 

















Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11.798 


2 

















Framingham, . 








11,749 


3 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 




- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Arlington,. 








10,520 


3 


1 














Greenfield, 






10,140 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,356,606 



733 337 



273 



30 



51 6 



1 The populations were estimated upon the rate of growth from 1900 to 1905. Those of Tauuton, 
Gloucester, North Adams and Clinton were allowed to stand as in 1905, having shown no increase 
during the live-year period. The gain in the population of Lowell is due to the annexation of a 
part of the town of Tewksbury. The population of Lawrence by the census of 1905 was 70.050, but, 
owing to the building of the new Wood and Arlington mills, an increase of about 8,000 is estimated 
by the Lawrence board of health, or 78,000. 



166 



Week ending Aug. h, 1909. 





i 


•= 


1 




Deaths from — 




ll 


J= 


£ 






CITIES AND TOWNS. 


p 


In 

B 


= J2 


3 S 




a 


C 

> 








•2j= 


~ £ 


« 3 . 
CO m 


J 


i 


~ 


3^ 


g 








— a 


— o = 


§5 


43 


c. 


a 


a 

- 






" 


a 


5* 


■*) 


— 


A 


£ 


s 


Boston, 


024,491 


221 


89 


92 


16 


19 




1 




Worcester, 








186,476 


50 


16 


16 


2 


4 


- 


- 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


54 


32 


38 


- 


2 


- 


1 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


29 


11 


14 


2 


4 


- 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96J580 


39 


12 


19 


1 


3 


- 


2 


1 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


46 


31 


25 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


22 


9 


8 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


34 


14 


13 


1 


2 


1 


1 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


33 


23 


13 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Somerville, 








76,049 


19 


7 


6 


- 


1 


2 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


9 


4 


3 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


21 


13 


12 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


16 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


12 


5 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


9 


3 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


16 


9 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


18 


6 


6 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, . 








34,263 


6 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


7 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


7 


4 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


13 


5 


9 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


5 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


9 


2 


5 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Brook line, . 








26,674 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


10 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


7 


6 


6 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


4 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


9 


5 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


7 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


14 


7 


6 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


6 


4 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


7 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


2 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


4 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


6 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


10 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, 








14,522 


3 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


- 


- 


- 


-" 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


3 


1 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


5 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


1 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, 








12 722 


3 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown , 








12|676 


3 


1 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


3 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington,. 








10,520 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 






10,140 


1 


~ 


1 


' 


— 


— 


— 


— 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,351,327 



1 813 


349 


316 


32 51 


4 


7 



167 



Week ending Aug. 21, 1909. 





a 


•= 


" 




Dkaths 


PROM — 




at 

c — 


JZ 

Q 


u 

3 










CITIES AND TOWNS. 




M 

= 5 




a 


-- 
> 
- 










— ~i 


ir - ' 
33« 


3 « 


'- 


Sz 


Z 


jj/ 




o H 


£w 


g£ 


pvi C 


c — 


"~ 


c. 




- 






- 


- 




< 


— 


- 


6- 


- 


Boston, 


624,401 


223 


102 


105 


4 


20 


1 


2 


2 


Worcester, 








136,476 


34 


18 


4 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Fall River, 








106,486 


44 


32 


24 


2 


2 


- 


- 


_ 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


28 


15 


18 


- 


6 


- 


- 


_ 


Lowell, 








96,380 


44 


17 


18 


3 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


34 


23 


24 


2 


3 


1 


- 


_ 


Lynn, . ' 








84,623 


26 


13 


5 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


17 


10 


6 


3 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


31 


13 


12 


- 


4 


1 


- 


_ 


Somerville, 








76,049 


22 


9 


12 


1 


3 


1 


- 


_ 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


13 


7 


4 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


28 


18 


19 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


11 


4 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


15 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Newton, 








39,642 


9 


3 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Salem, 








39,019 


15 


10 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


_ 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


15 


4 


3 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


8 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Everett, 








33,597 


10 


2 


3 


- 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


4 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


12 


4 


7 


- 


- 


- 


- 


1 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


9 


2 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


_ 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


6 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


6 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


4 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


13 


5 


5 


- 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


Northampton, 








21,075 


7 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


15 


5 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


Medford, . 








20,921 


5 


- 


2 


- 


2 


_ 


- 


_ 


Beverly, 








16,386 


11 


8 


7 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


7 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


4 


2 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


4 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


5 


4 


1 


- 


1 


- 


^ 


_ 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


4 





2 


- 


2 


- 


_ 


_ 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


2 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


8 


8 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


5 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, . 








12 722 


1 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


4 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


4 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


2 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


3 


- 


- 


~ 


- 


- 


- 


- 



Recajritulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,379,468 



786 



366 



306 



21 63 



168 



Week ending Aug. 28, 1909. 





J. 


B 


V 




Deaths i 


-ROM 








o 


.= 


'*4 




























CITIES AND TOWNS. 




•o 


0J 

03 " 


O. O n 


be 

5J 


• 


u 


u 

9 
> 


& 




|a 


is 


i* 


! t == 


§5 


2 




"E 


s 






at 


a 


£ 


< 


— 


a 


f- 


2 


Boston, 


624,491 


201 


95 


90 


10 


21 


2 


1 


_ 


Worcester, 








136,476 


46 


21 


9 


1 


3 


1 


1 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


49 


26 


28 


4 


5 


- 


- 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


25 


14 


11 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


41 


22 


13 


1 


3 


1 


- 


- 


New Bedford, . 








85,516 


44 


22 


23 


- 


5 


- 


1 


- 


Lynn,. 








84,623 


22 


11 


4 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


21 


5 


9 


1 


3 


- 


1 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


32 


14 


7 


1 


1 


1 


3 


- 


Somerville, 








76,049 


26 


4 


6 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


14 


9 


5 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


26 


12 


15 


2 


3 


- 


1 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


14 


6 


2 


- 


- 


- 




- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


2 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39.642 


10 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


19 


6 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


12 


6 


3 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, . 








34,263 


8 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, . 








33,597 


10 


1 


3 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


13 


7 


9 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


14 


7 


7 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


7 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27 932 


13 


4 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26|o74 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


10 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


-' 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


6 


1 


o 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


5 


2 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20.921 


4 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


4 


3 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


4 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


5 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


5 


2 


1 


- 


_ 


- 


1 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westlield, . 








14,750 


9 


4 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, 








14,522 


6 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


o 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborougb, 








13,913 


5 


2 


5 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


7 


7 


5 


- 


- 


5 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


6 


3 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, . 








12,722 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


7 


3 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,614 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


4 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


1 


" 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


7 


3 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 




Framingham, 








11,749 


5 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


4 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 





— 














Recapitulation, 


Total of reporting towns, 


2,879,468 


792 


353 


282 


27 


65 


14 


10 


- 



L69 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CERTAIN INI BOI IOU8 

DISEASES. 



|)i:\i us i i;o \i Imk<i [OUfl DlS] 

\i;o\ i. Tables during the 91 



WKKK KM>I50 — 



DISEASE. 


Place. 








v -• -■ 


Cerebro-spinal meningitis, 


Boston , 

Cambridge, 

Haverhill, 
Lawrenoe, , 

New Bedford, 
Newburyport, 
Tannton, . 
Worcester, 




8 

1 

1 


a 

i 

i 

i 


i 


1 

6 


Scarlet fever, .... 


Lawrence, . 

Lowell, 

Now Bedford, 

Springfield, 

Waltham, . 








i 


1 

1 


Whooping cough, 


Adams, 

Boston, 

Haverhill, 

Lynn,. 

North Adams, 

Taunton, . 

Worcester, 




1 


i 
i 

i 

i 


1 




Boston, 
Lowell, 


l 


i 


Tuberculosis other than pul- 
monary. 


Arlington, 

Boston, 

Cambridge, 

Chelsea, 
Fall River. 
Greenfield, 
Haverhill, 
Holyoke, . 
Medford, . 

North Adams, 
Pittstield, . 
Quincy, 
Somerville, 

Springfield, 


; 


:; s fi 

_ _ q 

1 
1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

i i : 


1 

1 
1 

1 

1 
1 


Meningitis other than cerebro- "Leominster, 
spinal. Lynn, 

Medford, . 


1 
1 


1 

1 




- 


i 


- 


- 



170 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF CASES OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES. 



Cases of Infectious Diseases reported during the Weeks of 
Aug. 7, 14, 21 and 28, 1909. 

[Under the provisions of section 52 of chapter 7"> of the Revised Laws.] 



Week ending — 



Aug. 7. 



Aug. 14. 



Aug. 21. 



Aug. 28. 



Diphtheria, 

Measles, 

Scarlet fever, 

Typhoid fever, 

Tuberculosis, pulmonary, . 
Cerebro-spinal meningitis, . 

Whooping cough, 

Varicella, 

Erysipelas, 

Mumps, 

Ophthalmia neonatorum, 
Tuberculosis other than pulmonary, . 
Meningitis other than cerebro-spinal, 

Tetanus, 

Trachoma, 



83 

114 

71 

46 

156 

1 

21 

6 

1 

1 

3 



89 
38 
59 
61 
146 

7 
31 

4 



01 
45 
86 

82 

128 

1 

21 

7 



100 

32 

79 

85 

152 

5 

14 

3 

1 
7 
1 
1 



MONTHLY REPORT ON INSPECTION OF FOOD AND DRUGS. 



The following summary presents the results of the examination of food 
and drugs made by the State Board of Health during the month of 
August, 1909: — 



Articles examined. 


Number 
found 

to be of 
Good 

Quality. 


Number 
adulterated 

or varying 
from the 

Legal 
Standard. 


Total. 


Articles examined. 


Number 
found 

to be of 
Good 

Quality. 


Number 

adulterated 

or varying 

from the 

Legal 
Standard. 


Total. 


Butter, . 
Canned fruit and 

vegetables, 
Cheese, . 
Cider, . 
Clams, . 
Cocoa, . 

Condensed milk, . 
Confectionery, 
Cream, . 
Drugs, . 

Flavoring ex- 
tracts : — 

Lemon, 

Vanilla, . 
Giape juice, . 
Jams and jellies, . 
Malt liquors, 
Maple syrup, 


3 

3 
1 

1 
1 
1 
3 
1 
8 
79 

o 

4 
1 

2 
2 

1 


13 


3 

3 

1 

1 
1 
1 
3 
1 
8 
92 

2 
4 
1 
2 
2 
1 


Meat products : — 
Canned meats, . 
Hamburg steak, 
Lambs' tongues, 

Milk, . 

Mince meat, 

Pressed meat, 

Sausages, 

Tripe, . 

Sundries, 

Non-alcoholic 
drinks, 

Olive oil, 

Pickles, 

Syrups, 

Table sauces, 

Vinegar, 

Total, . 


5 
1 
1 
271 
1 
1 
8 
3 
3 

3 

8 
2 

1 
1 
3 


144 

1 

1 
2 
1 


5 
1 
1 
415 
1 
1 
8 
3 
4 

3 
9 
4 
2 

i 

3 


425 


162 


587 



171 



The samples of drugs round to be adulterated rare alcohol, b 
tincture of ginger and lime water. 

The cities and towns in which samples were collected were: Beverly, 
Boston, Brookline, Cambridge, Chelsea, Concord, Dalton, Dedham, 
Fall River, Franklin, Gloucester, Great Barrington, Eaverhill, Hol- 
brook, Hudson, Hull, Hyde Park, Lawrence, Lee. L ington, Lowell, 
Lynn, Marlborough, Milford, New Bedford, North Adams, North Attle- 
borough, North Andover, Norwood, Pittsfield, Provincetown, Beading, 
Rockport, Salem, Stoneham, Taunton, Topsfield, Truro, Walpole, 
Waltham, Westborough, Wilmington, Williamstown, Winchester, Woburn 
and Worcester. 

PROSECUTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW RELATING 
TO FOOD AND DRUGS. 



Thirty-three convictions were secured during the month of August, 
1909, for selling adulterated food and drugs, as follows : — 



Name of Defendant. 



Character of Article sold. 



George L. Sharpnor, 

John A. Burgner, . 

John A. Burgner, . 

Joseph A. Butler, . 

Thomas Connelley, 

Thomas Connelley, 

David S. Clarke, . 

David S. Clarke, . 

Alexander Francis, 

Alexander Francis, 

Albert H. Friend, 

Albert H. Friend, 

Robert Hargrove, 

Isaiah R. Kimball (H. P. Hood & 

Son) , . 
Isaac Knudson, 
Joseph Loehr, 
Frank Loehr, . 
Chas. R. Luther, 
Harry C. Lyons, 
Harry C. Lyons, 
North Shore Dairy Association, 
North Shore Dairy Association, 
North Shore Dairy Association. 
Willard O. Putnam, 
Willard O. Putnam, 
Willard O. Putnam, 
Edgar A. Sargent, . 
Michael S. Tavitian, 
Michael S. Tavitian, 
Henry H. Wehry, . 
Willis E. Wheeler, 
Geo. L. Darnphenee, 
Geo. L. Damphenee, 



North Andover, 

Dalton, . 

Dalton , . 

Gloucester, 

Gloucester, 

Gloucester, 

Topsfield, 

Topsfield, 

Truro, 

Truro, 

Gloucester, 

Gloucester, 

Woburn, 

Lawrence, 
Gloucester, 
Pittsfield, 
Washington, 
Sutton, . 
Bradford, 
Bradford, 
Gloucester, 
Gloucester, 
Gloucester, 
North Andover, 
North Andover, 
North Andover, 
Sutton, . 
Haverhill, 
Haverhill, 
Dalton, . 
Northborough, 
Millis, . 
Millis, . 



Cider. 

Milk (total 

Milk (total 

Milk (total 

Milk (total 

Milk (total 

Milk (total 

Milk (total 

Milk (total 

Milk (total 

Milk (total 

Milk (total 

Milk (total 

Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Tincture of 
Tincture of 



solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 

solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids. 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
solids, 
iodine, 
iodine, 



9.-15). 1 

11.87).= 

11.60). 

7.72).',= 

7.72). 3 

10.64). 2 

10.80). 

11.44).' 

11.44). 

7 80) * 
7.80) . B 
12.25). 1 

11.92). 
11.34). 

11.62). 
10.46).' 
11 74). l 
8.82). 

8 82).' 
9. 20). i, 3 
11).* 
11.80).' 
9.34).' 
11 24). 
11.24). 
10.46).' 
8.82).' 
11.06). 
11.16).- 
11.42). 



i Watered. - Skimmed. 3 Appealed. * Second offence. 

Fines imposed, $971. 



Contained aniline orange (coloring) . 



172 



o ® "i. 



® 



s a 



o c S 



t: st ' 
o ^ p 



s 






rt — 



s e * e h p - 



ired stn 
ired str 
ired str 

per ceil 
svater. 

per cei 
water. 

per cei 
water. 

per ce 
water. 


CI . 

o u 

aft 


3- 5" C*CT3 , S?-. r dO'd H ^ 


-f "^ 



S a 9 H o a 



3 t- ^ ~ ® 



- i 



art 






8-s 






3 fl-St- 



ti bn j-i o t; ■ 
,_, <^ «_, i-> t3 ' 
o © o 



!'3!!l' c ' J '3' r 35'CQ'w r l' Cr !' c !3 



,2- 
§ on ® g g O .K 'o .= 



rt - eS -rt _cj -3 






O W O oo rt 
n •- >-l — "S . 



09 __* 

g 3 

"o -S 
rt oo rt oo cS 



. © 

1— t r& 

. rt 



8-e 



S5 



I-. c o 

■_ - -. •_ 

S3 t? ° - 

£ S ® 

1-1 'C 



ln3'3r S 'u--'O r -'3^r; 



$ rt £ rt 

. S3°- <0 

S 2 x 2 

.eg - e! 

00 oo_ 

*0 *~ 'O *— 



*ii <n rii ^ — /-.TO*".^^^ — o ^ O •—. ^ ~" *-* — /~i *— ^ — r? . *•* — n — 



0.3 o .£ o .S 

'" cJ 00 jj oo ri 



?\S a", 5' 



w r» Or rt 
. OiOp 
0©0 0°OOo®0 

EhEhEhHEhEhHH 



i: 2 



WO©0®0®0®0 

' H H H 



o.5"o.S 

5 .2 c 



H Eh H 




c 

^ oo ijr 

§6° 

1 *•- 
ott, -; 



rja 



5^M 



© © o 

fflO « 

I- 5^ Eh 

® ^ °* 

<B tnO-l 
PT ® 

M02 



>> 2 



^ O® ® • 03 -S 

. _ ri T"7H i-~ •** C< 






_ • oo 

J^© 



a =a 

| a 
>^ 

rt a- 

1- 

rt n. 

" 03 

a ® 



S 5 

o O 



I W 



O <J 



■ c: d. a a 

2 sa s 

«" rt rt rt 
• i— i o o o 



03 03 G O © © 

^^a oi Z £ C rz 

— — H Eh C- & 

PU, Pk O OJ 03 O) _ 



s s a 



s s 



^^«^^^ (J303 

oooc^wo 

c;o3t-oot-t— t-c: 

H ^H 1-1 r-« 1-1 ^ CC CC 

M (N H N M fl 0030 



XX 



It 3 ZC " 



173 



a a 






c 


















a 










CD CD 




s 


<u 




Z 




03 




CD 


CD 




CD 


CD 


® 




9 


O O 




s 


cd 




CD 




CD 




CD 


CD 




CJ 


u 


o 




o 


* ft 
p, ft 




hi 


s-. 




hi 




h 




hi 


hi 




hi 


h 


hi 




hi 




s 


CD 




CD 




o 




CD 


CD 




CD 


® 


® 




00 




ft 


ft 




Pi 




ft 




a- 


ft 




ft 


— 


ft 




ft 






© 


© 




en 




t- 




8 


ira 




o 
-tl 


O 

i- 


o 

00 




oo 


* w 




-f 


CO 




CO 




(M 




TH 


•«i 




CO 


eo 


CO 




CO 


3 £ 




^ 


^ 




43 




w - 




+J- 


- 




" 


g 


jj 




^J- 










_o3 
















C3 










■H 


■H 








t+^ 




^ 


<ih 




»fH 




<H 




<H 


** "B 




^ 


•4-9 




+J 




^ 




jj 


^ 




. 


-hi 


^ 




J 


a s 

CD g 




a 


a 




a 




a 










a 


S 






a 




o 


CD 




CD 




<u 




CD 


CD 




CD 


. ® 




® 


c ^ O 


u 


o 


hi « 


h 


o 


h 


o 


hi 


CD 


hi o 


b 


« h^ 


w 


hi CD 


h, 


« hi 


u ® n 

s £ ® 


CD 


CD 


2 hi 


i 


hi 

CD 

Pi 


'CD 


t-l 


'U 


hi 
CD 
ft 


CD 
w hi 


CD 


mS 


hi 

CD 


2 h, 


a 


h=2 


03 


o3 2 

£ ft 




03 


CD 
ft 




C3 CD 
^ ft 


03 


CD o3 
ft^ 


03 ® 
fc ft 




® oj 

ft & 


. CD • CD 


o 
o 


CD° 


Td TH^d 


Ol 


id 

CD 


cri 


r^)T»l 
CD '" , 


CD 




CO 

S 


® . 


ffl 


° ® 


H^H 


Td<M id ^ 


-a 


rH 


d © ^ CN ^ rci 


-O 


— 'OCN'0 N 


-3 




tH^' -1 


T3 


T— ( 


'w rH 




1-1 


d 




Td 




T3rH 


a 


rH-O 




"Onns 


rtTd 


- eS - 


03 






rt 




03 




03 




05 . 


03 


. «5 




oj . 


03 


. 03 


CO __ CO 

^d "dirj 
.S CD .X 


d 

o 


CO 


CD ^3 


d 

cd 


1 


-d 


1 


■d 

CD 


on 




rd 

CD 


IS ® 




'a Td 


-d 

CD 


S ® 


'o.S'o 




O 


OS 

•IH Q 


a 


O 


a 


"3 




O 


.So 


a 


^5 e 
o — 


o 


.So 


a 


"o .S 


CO ^ CO 


05 


X 1 


c3 co 


s 


co 


03 


CO 


03 


X 


03 co 


73 


CO 03 


X 


03 M 


03 


CO ^ 




































J § * 





e9 


o| 


o 


03 


5 


03 


O 


«a 


5^ 


c 


J 5 


p3 


oS 


c 


5 5 


o w o 


o 


o 


O o 


CD 


O 


CD 


O 


CD 


o 


a o 


o 


o « 


O 


O o 


o 


o w 


H H 




H 


H 




H 




H 




H 


H 




H 


H 


H 




H 


s 


























v 








































CO 
0Q 


* 
































05 


CO 
TO 




























- 




s 


03 




























CO 






§ 






CO 




CO 














CO 




CO 




03 


a 
o 

60 

C 

"hi 

t-l 

o3 

M 

+3 






03 

CD 

h, 
CD 

. a 
o 

hT 

CD 




O 

hi 

a 
n 

H 

TO 




CO 

03 

h. 

O 

Td 






CO 
CO 
03 

a 

hi 
S3 

■§ 




CO 

cS 

d 
o 

05 

n 




J3* 

be 
P" 
o 
hi 
o 

05 




fa 
CD 

■d 
>> 

w 

to 

d 
o 
a 
o 
Q 


e3 
CD 

hi 

a 








"5 
a 

03 




CD 

s 






cd" 




Td" 
hi 
05 














g 




fa 




CD 






t» 




D3 




ffl 






















o 




o 




S3 




« 








S 
OS 

w 

^d 




«1 




3 






hi 




a 
o 




O 
O 




% 








hi 

CD 

a 




5 

5 






hi 
o3 

w 




n 

CD 

^3 




03 

1-5 




CO 

03 


e3 






cS 




03 




a 






hi 

CD 




ft 

-a 




a 




a 

o 


CD 

CO 






3 

CD 




CD 




03 

hi 






O 






o3 
hi 




o 






h5 




^ 




h 






03 




<^ 




fa 




H 


D* 






^ 




,M 




^ 






^ 




M 




M 




JA 




































£ 






S 




i 




S 






S 




S 




§ 




U 









- — 














— 















0303 






03 03 




t~ 




M 






^03 




03 




CO t- 




(M 






b- er: 




cc 




>Q 










GO 




oo oo 




»o 


co in 






t— I r-1 








re: 






t~ oo 




t— 




CM Ol 




CN 


CO CO 






o o 




C 




O 






oo 








c o 




O 


a: as 






i-l I-H 




rH 










t—l T-i 




T-l 











174 



INSPECTION OF DAIRIES. 



During the month of August, 1909, 147 dairies were examined in 
the following places: — 



Place. 


Number 
examined. 


Number found 

to present 

no Objectionable 

Features. 


Per Cent. 


Number to 

which Letters 

were sent. 


Per Cent. 


Acton, 












Fourth inspection, 






2 


- 


- 


2 


100.00 


Beverly, . 






- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Third inspection, 






1 


1 


100.00 


- 


- 


Chilmark, 






1 


1 


100. 00 


- 


- 


Dalton, . 






1 


1 


100.00 


- 


- 


Second inspection, 






1 


- 


- 


1 


100.00 


Eastham, 






1 


1 


100.00 


- 


- 


Edgartown, . 






8 


6 


75.00 


2 


25.00 


Hinsdale, 






6 


- 


- 


6 


100.00 


Nantucket, 






40 


10 


25.00 


30 


75.00 


Oak Bluffs, . 






6 


2 


33.33 


4 


66.67 


Orleans, . 






1 


- 


- 


1 


100.00 


Pittsfield, 






12 


- 


- 


12 


100.00 


Second inspection, 






10 


2 


20.00 


8 


80.00 


Provincetown, 






10 


2 


20.00 


8 


80.00 


Richmond, 






7 


- 


- 


7 


100.00 


Sandwich, 






20 


10 


50.00 


10 


50.00 


Tisbury, . 






4 


4 


100.00 


- 


- 


Truro, 






15 


9 


60.00 


6 


40.00 


Washington, . 






1 


1 


100.00 


- 


- 



Total number of dairies examined, 147 

Number found to be free from objectionable conditions, 50 

Number to which letters were sent, 97 

Total number of conditions to which attention was called, 263 

Percentage of dairies which passed inspection, 34.01 

The names of the owners of dairies found to be worth}' of commenda- 
tion follow : — 

Beverly. 

Cherry Hill Farm l 

Chilmark. 

Colcord, J. H. J. 

Dalton. 

Crane, Frederick E. 

Eastham. 

Knowles, S. D. 



i Third Inspection. 



Cleveland, Asa L. 
Cleveland, H. J. 



Cabot, Channing 
Crosby, (Miss) Mary 
Gardner, John C. 
Gardner, Wallace 



Edgartown. 

Norton, Allen R. Vincent, John P. 

Norton, Clement Vincent, W. G. 



Nantucket. 

Gordon, Harry 
E. Lewis, S. L., Jr. 

Morris, Charles C. 



Pitman, C. H. 
Roberts, David 
Thurston, Charles W. 



Oak Bluffs. 
Chase, F. W. Smith, George 

Pittsfield. 
Gale, A. D.*t Osteyee, H. B.*t 

Provincetoivn. 

King, John I. Smith, J. S. 



Armstrong, R. F. 
Blake, C. H. 
Fish, George 
Holway, F. R. 



Sandwich. 

Howland, E. R. 
Howland, Frank 
Parker, George 



Tisoury. 



Look, Orin 
Norton, Ernest 



Smith, William 
Tobey, Frank 
Tulas, Herman 



West, E. M. 
Whiting, J. 



Truro. 

Cabrall, Joseph Grozier, Frank 

Francis, A. A. Perry, John 

Francis, J. S. Rogers, Antone 

Washington. 

Loehr, Frank 



Small, E. L. 
Small, Warren W 
Small, W. M. 



THE HARMFUL EFFECTS OF ACETANILID, ANTIPYRIN AND 

PHEWACETIN. » 



One of the most interesting and, for physicians, most instructive 
bulletins published by the Bureau of Chemistry at Washington has 
recently been issued on " The Harmful Effects of Acetanilid, Antipyrin 
and Phenacetin,'' bv Dr. L. F. Ivebler, with the collaboration of Drs. 



Second inspection. f Reported favorably on first inspection. 

1 Editorial, Journal American Medical Association, July 24, 1909. 



176 

F. P. Morgan and Philip Rupp. For some time " The Journal " and 
a few other medical journals have heen warning physicians of the 
dangers of the indiscriminate use of these valuable drugs ; likewise a 
few of the better lay journals, among which " Collier's " and the " Ladies' 
Home Journal " take first rank, have carried the same warning to the 
public. The authors of this bulletin say, regarding the raison d'etre 
of the investigation made by the government, on this subject: "The 
purpose of the inquiry was not to depreciate in any way the value of 
these substances as medicinal agents, but rather to furnish information 
to the public which would enable them to understand that these remedies 
should be employed with caution in the absence of reliable medical 
advice. •. . ." And further: "The harm done by acetanilid does not 
result from its proper use under the direction of the physician, but is 
mainly the result of the promiscuous and indiscriminate use of the prod- 
uct by the laity." 

With regard to the habit-producing qualities of acetanilid, antipyrin 
and acetphenetidin (phenacetin), the bulletin states that "the habit 
is acquired in most instances through the use of the remedy, without 
the supervision of the physician, for the relief of the minor aches and 
pains, especially headache." This fact was further emphasized by the 
statistics collected, which showed that " proprietary preparations were 
used in at least 50, or 44.6 per cent., of the 112 instances of the habitual 
use of acetanilid." As to the toxic qualities of acetanilid the following 
is instructive : of the total number of cases of poisoning recorded, " more 
than one-third were reported during the year and a half following the 
advent of acetanilid as a medicinal agent in August, 1886. . . ." These 
cases were, doubtless, nearly all due to physicians' lack of knowledge 
regarding the toxic properties of what was then a new drug. As physi- 
cians learned of the danger, " the number of cases of poisoning fell off 
rapidly, and during the thirteen years following 1891 the number 
averaged but 6 annually." 

Then came the innings of the nostrum exploiter, and " headache 
cures," "brain foods" and fake synthetic analgesics flooded the market 
and were indiscriminately used by the public. The result was a large 
number of cases of poisoning reported during this later period — since 
1904. The "notable increase," both in the number of cases and in the 
number of deaths, is accounted for by the government investigators as 
follows: "This can be adequately explained by the fact that during 
recent years the control of acetanilid as a remedial agent has rapidly 
passed from the hands of the medical profession to those of the laity, 
owing largely to the advertising efforts of the manufacturers of pro- 
prietary medicines." The use of nostrums containing acetanilid has 



177 

increased enormously during the past few years. We read, in fact, that, 
while proprietary preparations containing acetanilid are not mentioned 

in the reports from 1897 to 1904, inclusive, yet in 1905 proprietaries 
were responsible for 55.5 per cent, of the cases of poisoning reported, 
in 1906 for 63.1 per cent., and in 1907 for no fewer than 87.5 per 
cent. "The Journal" has been accused of being too severe on the 
"headache powders" and similar preparations; this, too, not only by 
the proprietary interests, but occasionally by its friends. Certain it 
is that " The Journal " has never made such a scathing arraignment as 
that of this government document. . . . 



THE COMMERCIAL PASTEURIZATION OF MILK. 1 



By B. R. Richards, 2 Columbus, O. 



Absteact. 

The pasteurization of milk is a subject which has received its due 
share of attention in the last few years. As a very natural sequence to 
the epidemic traced to milk, and also due in part, no doubt, to the estab- 
lishment of bacterial milk standards by health boards, we find an in- 
creasing tendency on the part of the milk producers and milk contractors 
or handlers toward the pasteurization of their product. 

Three of our large contracting milk firms were in 1908 pasteurizing 
a large proportion of their milk, two pasteurizing practically all of their 
bottle trade, a third pasteurizing all his milk except that sold to milk 
peddlers. 

Each of the three different firms pasteurizing milk for the Boston 
trade use a different make of machine, each machine being radically 
different from the others. 

At least four visits were made to each concern for the purpose of 
taking samples. On each trip an average of 20 samples were taken, 10 
as the milk went into the machines and 10 as it came from the cooling 
apparatus, the time limit between the taking of the two sets of samples 
being adjusted as closely as was possible to the time necessary for the 
milk to pass through the apparatus, so that the same lot- of milk, prac- 
tically speaking, was tested before and after the process. 

1 Read before the American Public Health Association at Winnipeg, August, 190S. The collec- 
tion of specimens and the laboratory work on which this paper is based was by W. M. Campbell, 
milk bacteriologist. Reprinted from the American Journal of Public Hygiene for August, 1909. 

2 Written while director of the Boston board of health laboratory. 



178 







Table No. 1. 








No. of 
Samples 
taken. 


Milk exposed 

to 
Air during — 


Temperature (Degrees F.). 


Time 


Febm, 


Before. 


During. 


After. 


exposed to 
Heat. 


X, . 

Y,. 

Z, . 


36 

40 

50 


En tire 
process. 

Cooling 
only. 

Cooling 
only. 


38-50 
47-54 
52-58 


154-160 : 43-48 
140-148 48-50 
158-165 46-52 


Estimated 

3 min. 
20 nun. 

Estimated 
3-5 min. 



It will be seen that the machines in which the milk is exposed to heat 
for a short period of time are heated to a higher temperature than the 
one which holds the milk for twenty minutes. 

According to Eosenau 1 140° F. for two minutes is sufficient to kill 
the diphtheria, typhoid and dysentery organisms, but at least twenty 
minutes at 140° F. are necessary to kill the bacilli of tuberculosis. A 
momentary exposure at 160° will, however, kill the latter. 

It is evident, then, that as far as the organisms mentioned are con- 
cerned, with the possible exception of B. tuberculosis, the processes as 
ordinarily carried on are sufficient to kill, and we may safely infer 
that the infecting material from other diseases, such as scarlet fever, 
would also succumb. While the control of the temperature is left to 
human hands, however, there is likelihood of the temperature falling 
low enough at times to fail to kill and even acting to multiply the 
organisms. One instance of this will be noted later. In addition, one 
must bear in mind the possibility of infection of milk by handling subse- 
quent to pasteurization. 

Out of 125 samples taken at different times, only 22 samples, or 18 
per cent., were below the limit of 500,000 bacteria per cubic centimeter. 
The average count of each dealer was above this limit. As samples were 
taken at different periods between the first of March and the middle of 
June, 1908, some allowance may be made for the extremely hot weather 
during the latter part of that time. It is, nevertheless, apparent that a 
certain proportion of the milk going into certain of the machines was 
of higher bacterial content than should be allowed to be pasteurized. 

J Bulletin 42. Hygienic Laboratory, U. S. P. H. ami M. H. S., p. 82. 






179 

Table No. 2. — Effect of Past;;[.i;izatiox. 
[ Baaed on all first nny counts.] 



Contractor. 


Total. 


Average Count 

before 
Pasteurization. 


Average Count 

after 
Pasteurization. 


■ nt. 
Effici" 


X 

Y, . . . 

Z, 


27 i 

39 

50 


688,000 

881,000 

3,576,000 


15,000 

9,750 

273,000 


97.7 
98.9 
92.4 



1 In one set of experiments this pasteurizer was evidently not being run successfully, the pas- 
teurizer acting not as such but as an incubator. For the sake of comparison this set of nine tests 
is omitted from the above table and given below : — 
Before pasteurizing, 716,000; after pasteurizing, 2,196,000; increase, 30 percent, (approx.). 

The above table shows the amount of and percentage reduction by 
pasteurization in the number of bacteria contained in the milk. In a 
milk previously of high bacterial content;, we have, after pasteurization, 
all the dead and disintegrating bodies of the bacteria, all the bacterial 
products previously formed in the milk and to some extent probably 
unchanged by the heating, plus in some cases an amount of cooked dung 
and dirt varying with the original condition of the sample. By the 
reduction of the number of bacteria through the heating process, the 
criterion by which we now judge a dirty, old or improperly kept milk 
is temporarily lost. It is undoubtedly true that what organisms are 
left multiply Avith greater rapidity than before in the pasteurized milk, 
as shown in the following table : — 



Table No. 3. — Showing Relative Increase in Bacteria in Pasteurized 
and Unpasteurized Milk at Ice Box Temperature. 

[87 samples (based on those samples on which a twenty-four hour count was obtained.)] 





Unpasteurized Milk, Aver- 
age Count. 


Pasteurized Milk, Average 
Count. 


After twenty-four hours in ice chest, . 
Per cent, increase, 


1,087,000 

22,617,000 

2,100 

1 


44,000 

3,691,000 

8,400 

4 



In other words, on the average, bacteria will increase four times as 
fast in pasteurized milk as in unpasteurized milk when kept twenty- 
four hours at the temperature of the ice box. This figure coincides 



180 

iiliiiosi exactly with that obtained by St. John and Pennington in Phil- 
adelphia. 1 

Pasteurized milk seems to keep longer, but eventually acquires a strong 
odor and really may be said to decompose rather than sour. In nearly 
every instance we found that the pasteurized milk, though heavily 
loaded with bacteria, did not decompose until after the unpasteurized 
milk taken at the same time had curdled. That such milk is unfit for 
food — especially for babies — goes without saying. 

Effect of Pasteurization on the Bacterial Analysis of Milk. 
In addition to the fact that we are obliged to pass dirty milk recently 
pasteurized because of its low count, we have found during this investi- 
gation that pasteurization affects our results in two other ways. In the 
direct microscopic examination of the milk sediment we have been able, 
by means of Dr. Slack's method, to make a close estimation of the num- 
ber of bacteria present, thus " passing " such samples as were evidently 
below the limit of 500,000 bacteria per cubic centimeter. At the same 
time samples showing streptococci, increased leucocytes or pus were 
detected.. In pasteurized milk the leucocyte estimate is much larger on 
account of the greater precipitation of cells in milk that has been heated, 
this result confirming the results reported by Eussell last year before the 
Laboratory Section of the American Public Health Association. "We 
have also noticed a higher bacterial estimate as compared with plate 
counts from the heated milk. This is probably due to such milk con- 
taining a large number of dead bacteria or bacteria so affected by heat 
as to be incapable of reproduction. 

Summary. 

1. A large amount of milk is pasteurized in Boston every day. Some 
of the milk of one contractor is pasteurized in the country and is again 
pasteurized here. 

2. The amount of milk pasteurized is probably increasing. 

3. Some of this milk is of very high bacterial content. 

4. Bacteria will increase much faster in pasteurized than in unpas- 
teurized milk. 

5. The pasteurization of milk affects the microscopic estimate of 
bacteria and leucocytes. 

i St. John and Pennington, Journal Infectious Diseases, Vol. 4, p. C47. 



181 



Conclusions. 

1. Commercial pasteurization of milk without restriction puts a pre- 
mium on dirty milk, since dirty and old milk, otherwise unsalable, can 
then be put on the market. 

2. Pasteurized milk may well mean cooked dirt, cooked dung and 
cooked bacterial products, and the laboratory is powerless to detect it, 
unless apparent to the naked eye. 

3. The commercial pasteurization as at present practiced in Boston 
probably would destroy all disease-producing organisms, with the pos- 
sible exception of the bacilli of tuberculosis. The latter would probably 
be killed in the majority of instances. One machine only out of the 
three tested would be likely always to destroy the latter. The toxins 
produced by these and by the putrefactive organisms in dirty milk would 
undoubtedly escape unharmed, and in many cases be capable of produc- 
ing severe intestinal disturbances — especially in babies. 

4. A false sense of security is undoubtedly conveyed by the term 
pasteurized milk. The lack of security may come from either improper 
pasteurization, the pasteurization of improperly handled milk or im- 
proper care of pasteurized milk. 

5. The unrestricted pasteurization of improperly kept, old or dirty 
milk should be prevented by regulations or ordinances prohibiting the 
pasteurization of milk containing over a certain specified number of 
bacteria per cubic centimeter, the bacterial limit being set with due 
regard to local conditions, especially the distance from which the milk 
comes. Such regulation should, of course, be coupled with a regulation 
forbidding the sale of milk above the bacterial limit established. 

6. The law should require that milk heated above 140° F. 1 should be 
marked heated or pasteurized milk. Pasteurized milk should not be 
sold as fresh milk. 

* The pasteurization of milk in itself is probably not a harmful process, 
and is, perhaps, to a certain extent, a necessity under modern condi- 
tions in large cities, but commercial pasteurization should be carried on 
only under the most stringent supervision. 

i The Massachusetts Legislature of 1908 passed an act requiring the labeling of all milk heated 
above 167° F. as " heated milk." The law as it stands is useless. 






MONTHLY If I BULLETIN 



OF THE 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH 



OF 



MASSACHUSETTS. 



An official publication of the State Board of Health of Massachusetts, issued monthly 
from the office of the Board, 145 State House, Boston, Mass. 



New Series. SEPTE3IBER, 1909. Vol. 4. No. 9. 



Entered at the Post-office at Boston, Feb. 15, 1906, as Second-class Matter, act 

OF JULT 16, 1894. 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. 



HENRY P. WALCOTT, M.D., Cambridge, Chairman. 



JULIAN A. MEAD, M.D., WATERTOWN. 
HIRAM F. MILLS, C.E., LAWRENCE. 



JAMES W. HULL, Pittsfield. 
CHARLES H. PORTER, QriXCY. 



GERARD C. TOBET, ESQ., TVareham. ROBERT TV. LOVETT, M.D., BOSTOX. 



MARK W. RICHARDSON, M.D., Secretary. 



BOSTON: 

WEIGHT & POTTER PRINTING CO., STATE PRINTERS, 

18 Post Office Square. 

1909. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



Pagr 

Weekly returns of deaths from cities and towns of more than 10,000 population, . 185 

Weekly returns of deaths from certain infectious diseases, 189 

Weekly returns of cases of infectious diseases, ........ 190 

Monthly report on inspection of food and drugs, 190 

Prosecutions for violations of the law relating to food and drugs, .... 191 

List of adulterated foods, etc., for Septemher, 1909,, 192 

Inspection of dairies, 195 

Facts relating to dairies supplying milk for public sale in Fall River, . . . lii" 

Typhoid fever outbreak at Jefferson, Mass., ........ 198 

The State of Kansas and the common drinking cup, ....... 203 

Resignation and appointment, ........... 204 

Shaw's malt, prohibition of sale removed, 204 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CITIES AND TOWNS 
OF MORE THAN 10,000 POPULATION. 



Week ending Sept. 4, 1909. 





■z 


c 


© 

> 




Deaths 


FROM 








S3 




u 
















, , 


t* 
















© 














CITTES ANJ) TOWNS. 


*« u 


P 




M fl 


= . 
3 2 




£ 


> 






a« 


■o 


""* « 


"3 3 . 


h3 2 





3 


— j- 


^ 




S at 


.22 .c 

U y 

- 5 

gw 






gfl 




£ 


o 


3 




Pu 


X 


a 


a. 


•« 


a. 


5 


£■ 


a 


Boston, 


624,491 


185 


68 


77 


12 


17 


1 


l 


_ 


Worcester, 










1:36,476 


37 


10 


7 


1 


- 


1 


i 


- 


Fall River, 










106,486 


48 


28 


22 


3 


3 


- 


3 


- 


Cambridge, 










102,112 


32 


8 


17 


3 


7 


- 


- 


- 


Lowell, 










96,380 


39 


19 


9 


1 


3 


- 


1 


i _ 


New Bedford, . 










85,516 


35 


23 


20 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Lynn, . 










84,623 


21 


9 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Springfield, 










84,237 


15 


6 


7 


- 


3 


1 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 










78,000 


34 


20 


14 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Somerville, 










76,049 


9 


3 


4 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 










55,039 


8 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Holyoke, . 










53,590 


21 


8 


7 


2 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Maiden, 










41,941 


7 


- 


2 


- 


o 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 










40,080 


10 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 










39,642 


6 


3 














Salem, 










39,019 


15 


8 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 










38,362 


15 


6 


5 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Fitchburg, 










34,263 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, 










33,597 


3 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 










31,937 


7 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 










30,967 


22 


11 


10 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Waltham, . 










28,761 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 










27,932 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 










26,674 


5 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 










26,011 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 










22,150 


8 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, . 










21,075 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 










21,049 


7 


4 














Medford, . 










20,921 


3 


1 














Beverly, 










16,386 


11 


3 


8 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 










16,030 


7 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 










15,609 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 










15,459 


6 





1 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Newburyport, 










14,834 


6 


2 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 










14,820 


4 


4 














Westfield, . 










14,750 


3 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, . 










14,522 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 










14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, . 










14,456 


3 


3 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


A ttleborough , . 










13,913 


4 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 










13,685 


3 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 










13,105 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 










13,066 


3 


1 


.1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, . 










12,722 


6 


1 














Watertown , 










12,676 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 










12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 










11,848 


6 


4 


4 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 










11,798 


3 


1 














Framingham, 










11,749 


3 


1 










- 




Wakefield, 










11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


Webster, . 










11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 










10,520 


3 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 




Greenfield, 










10,140 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,306,089 



683 


286 


236 


29 


44 


4 


10 



i The populations wei - e estimated upon the rate of growth from 1900 to 1905. Those of Taunton, 
Gloucester, North Adams and Clinton were allowed to stand as in 1905, having- shown no increase 
during the live-year period. The gain in the population of Lowell is due to the annexation of a 
part of the town of Tewksbury. The population of Lawrence by the census of 1905 was 70,050, but, 
o wing to the building of the new "Wood and Arlington mills, an increase of about 8,000 is estimated 
by the Lawrence Board of Health, or 78,000. 



L86 



Week ending Sept. 11, 1909. 





■i 


c 


> 




IJKATIIS 


FROM 








«8 


.e 


E 














CITIES AND TOWNS. 


Q 

■a 


V 

c 

3 


« 3 . 


to 

3 a! 




u 

9 


u 

n 
> 

m 

s 6 * 






|a 


■2.C 






1~ 


2 


o. 


a. 








K 


Q 


£ 


< 


fc 





S" 


S3 


Boston, 


624,491 


196 


81 


81 


6 


19 


2 


:; 




Worcester, 
Fall River, 








186,476 


36 


12 


12 


4 


1 


- 


2 


- 








106,486 


47 


33 


25 


'J 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


32 


9 


9 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96,880 


46 


28 


13 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


27 


17 


11 


2 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


22 


8 


6 


3 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


12 


5 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


34 


16 


11 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Somerville, 








76,049 


8 


1 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


8 


6 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


1 


7 


7 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


11 


4 


3 


- 


1 


1 


1 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


8 


3 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


12 


4 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


8 


5 


6 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, . 








34,263 


17 


11 


4 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


10 


7 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


9 


5 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


25 


7 


13 


- 


3 


- 


1 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


7 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


15 


9 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


7 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


7 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


6 


2 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


6 


2 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,080 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


6 


B 


5 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


10 


•J 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


6 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, 








14,522 


3 





1 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


6 


3 


3 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


1 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


5 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


5 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Mil ford, . 








12,722 


.". 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Water town, 








12,676 


2 





- 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








[2,614 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


3 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


_ 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


3 


- 


1 


- 


— 


- 


_ 


- 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,365,783 720 310 241 35 47 5 



in 



1-7 



Wei r ending Sbpi i - . 1 ,r 





h 

11 

a -. 

c 


■ 

2 

« 

1 

- 


— 
c 
9 

I 




ma ►»'.* 






OITIBB A Nl. I'lWNS. 


- 


« 

- • 

- • 

§0 

- 




! 

* 






Boston, 


624,491 


177 


74 


78 


17 


11 


, 


, 


, 


WorceHter, 








186,478 


.34 


16 


7 








_ 


- 


Fall River, 








KX',,486 


62 




■ 1 


2 






- 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


28 


9 


12 


8 


» 


— 


— 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


4.-, 


19 


9 


1 


2 


1 


- 


- 


New Bedford, 








86,616 


23 


10 


1" 


1 


1 


- 


1 




Lynn,. 








84,628 


1!" 


7 


8 


- 


a 




- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,287 


28 


4 


7 


1 


i 




- 


1 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


37 


17 


16 


- 




- 


- 




Somerville, 








76,049 


21 


6 


6 


- 


- 




- 




Brockton, . 








55,039 


9 


6 




1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Holyoke, . 








68,690 


14 


7 


- 


1 


2 


- 


- 




Maiden, 








41, '.Ml 


11 


2 


8 


1 






- 




Chelsea, 








40,080 


7 


3 


2 


- 


■J 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


7 


1 


3 


1 


-' 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








89,019 


20 


3 


8 


- 


1 


- 




- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


19 


6 


6 


1 


l 


- 


- 


- 


Fitchhurg, 








34,263 


6 


4 














Everett, 








33,697 


7 


6 


1 


- 


l 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


10 


3 


• ■• 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


10 


3 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








2S.761 


12 


1 


2 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


10 


4 


2 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


4 


2 


- 




- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


13 


4 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 




North Adams, 








22,150 


6 


2 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


6 

















Chicopee, . 








21,049 


:. 


- 


3 


- 


8 


- 


- 


- 


Med ford, . 








20,921 


5 


3 


1 












Beverly, 








16,386 


5 


3 


4 


- 


l 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


5 


3 














Hyde Park, 








15,609 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


4 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


6 


2 














Revere, 








14,820 


1 


1 


1 


1 


- 


— 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, . 








14,622 


7 


2 


■J 




- 




- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,612 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


4 


2 














Attleborough, 








13,918 


10 


4 




- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,688 


5 


1 


a 


- 


2 




- 


- 


Clinton, 








18,106 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


6 


4 


i 




- 


- 


- 


- 


Mil ford, . 








12 722 


1 







- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12J676 


1 

















Plymouth, . 








12,614 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11. SIS 


4 


2 














Weymouth, 








11,798 


2 

















Framingham, 








11,749 


4 


2 














Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 






- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,620 


6 


2 


- 


- 






- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


1 


— 


~ 













Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,351,613 I 711 



279 



239 



39 60 



" 



188 



Wkek knding Sept. 25, 1909. 





a 


c 


> 




Deaths 


FROM 








~T3 


a 

9 

c 

•a 


9 

•a 














CITIES AND TOWNS. 


C 2 

"3 = . 






a 
C 
9 


9 

> 

9 

2 fe 






03 OJ 

"3 a 


ti-S 


— a 


O-Om 
IS « 


5^ 


^ 


o. 


"5 

.c 
a. 


2. 

a 
9 




b 


M 


Q 


£ 


«4 


£ 


5 


H 


£ 


Boston, 


624,491 


205 


62 


76 


13 


18 


3 


3 




Worcester, 








136,476 


42 


12 


7 


1 


2 


- 


1 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


38 


19 


19 


3 


1 


- 


2 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


30 


6 


9 


1 


3 


1 


1 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


51 


22 


9 


3 


- 


2 


- 


- 


New Bedford, . 








85,516 


30 


19 


12 


1 


1 




- 


- 


Lyun,. 








84,623 


21 


8 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


20 


5 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


35 


19 


15 


2 


3 


1 


- 


- 


Somerville, 








76,049 


16 


4 


3 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


7 


4 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


18 


7 


9 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


8 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


6 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


7 


1 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


11 


6 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


11 


4 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, . 








34,263 


11 


7 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


6 


2 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


9 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


11 


6 


7 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


7 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


7 


- 




1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


5 


1 




1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


2 


1 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


4 


2 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


6 


4 




- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


1 


1 




- 


- 


— 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


4 


2 




1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


4 


1 




1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 





- 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


4 


1 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


2 







- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


4 


2 




1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


4 


1 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


5 


3 




1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


2 







- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


5 


3 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


3 


1 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


3 


2 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


1 







- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


3 


2 




- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, . 








12,722 


3 







- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


4 

















Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,355,921 



682 


252 


200 


40 


39 


8 


8 



189 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS PROM CERTAIN INFECTIOUS 

DISEASES. 



Deaths from Infectious Diseases not specifn m.i.v mentioned in 
above Tables during the Weeks of Sept. 4, 11, 18 and 25, 1909. 











Wkkk esding — 


DISEASE. 


Place. 


Sept. 4. 


Sept. 11. 


Sept. 18. 


Sept. 25. 


Cerebro-spinal meningitis, 


Adams, 

Boston, 

Gardner, 

Holyoke, 

Lowell, 

Lynn,. 

New Bedfo 

Worcester, 


rd, 




1 
1 

1 

1 


1 
1 


1 
1 


1 


Scarlet fever, .... 


Boston, 
Fall River, 
Lawrence, . 
Lowell, 


1 
1 
1 


- 


1 
1 


Whooping cough, 


Boston, 
Brockton, . 
Fall River, 
Haverhill, 
Lawrence, . 
Taunton, . 
Worcester, 




1 
2 




1 
2 
1 


1 




Boston, 
Quincy, 
Springfield, 
Worcester, 


1 
1 




1 


1 


Tuberculosis other than pul- 
monary. 


Beverly, 

Boston, 

Brockton, . 

Cambridge, 

Fall River, 

Haverhill, 

Holyoke, . 

Lawrence, . 

Leominster, 

Melrose, 

Newburyport, 

Quincy, 

Southbridge, 

Springfield, 




1 
3 

2 

1 
1 

1 


- 


1 
3 
1 
1 

1 

1 

2 


i 

1 

1 

1 

1 
1 




Boston, 


- 


- 


1 


- 




Everett, . 


- 


- 


1 


- 



190 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF CASES OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES. 



Cases of Infectious Diseases reported during the Weeks of 
Sept. 4, 11, 18 and 25, 1909. 

[Under the provisions of section 52 of chapter 75 of the Revised Laws.] 



Week ending 




Diphtheria, 

Measles, 

Scarlet fever, 

Typhoid fever, .... 
Tuberculosis, pulmonary, . 
Cerehro-spinal meningitis, . 

Whooping cough 

Varicella, 

Erysipelas, 

Mumps, 

Ophthalmia neonatorum, 
Tuberculosis other than pulmonary, 

Smallpox, 

Tetanus, 

Tuberculosis, meningitis, . 
Trichinosis, 



MONTHLY REPORT ON INSPECTION OF FOOD AND DRUGS. 



The following summary presents the results of the examination of food 
and drugs made hj the State Board of Health during the month of 
September, 1909: — 



Articles examined. 



Baking powder, 

Canned fruit 

Cider, . 

Cocoa, . 

Confectionery, 

Cream, . 

Drugs, . 

Flavoring ex 
tracts, 

Grape juice, . 

Honey, . 

Jams and jellies, 

Malt liquors (ah') 

Maple syrup, 

Meat products : — 
Canned meat, 
Hamburg steak 



Number 
found 

to be of 
Good 

Quality. 



1 
2 

5 

6 

3!) 



Number 

adulterated 

or varying 

from the 

Legal 
Standard. 



11 



Articles examined. 



Number 
found 

to be of 
Good 

Quality. 



Meat products 
Con. 

Pressed meat, 

Sausages, . 
Milk, . 
Non-alcoholic 

drinks, 
Olive oil, 
Pickles, 
Potato flour, 
Salad dressing, 
Spices, . 
Syrups, 
Table sauce, 
Vinegar, 

Total, . 



3 

7 
458 

2 
10 

2 

1 
1 
12 
3 
2 

13 



588 



Number 

adulterated 

or varying 

from the 

Legal 
Standard. 



147 
1 



165 



3 

7 

605 

2 

11 

2 

1 
1 

12 
5 
4 

14 



753 



191 



The samples of drugs found to be adulterated were cocaine, hydro- 
chloride, borax, spirit of anise, spirit of camphor and peppermint. 

The cities and towns in which samples were collected were Adams, 
Attleborough, Boston, Brockton, Cambridge, Chelmsford, Cheshire, 
Concord, Dracut, Falmouth, Great Barrington, Haverhill, Hingham, 
Hyde Park, Lee, Leominster, Lenox, Lowell, Lynn, Marlborough, Mil- 
ford, Natick, Newton, Newburyport, North Adams, Oak Bluffs, Pitts- 
field, Plymouth, Reading, Eichmond, Ptockport, Somcrville, Springfield, 
Taunton and AVellesley. 



PROSECUTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OP THE LAW RELATING 
TO POOD AND DRUGS. 



Sixteen convictions were secured during the month of September, 
1909, for selling adulterated food and drugs, as follows : — 



No. 


Same of Defendant. 


Place. 


Character of Article sold. 


1 


Lawrence Cardella, 


Haverhill, 


Alcohol below standard. 


2 


Adolphe Bouchard, 






Dracut, . 


Milk (total solids, 11.50).' 


3 


Frank N. Chase, . 






Oak Bluffs, . 


Milk (total solids, 11.53)." 


4 


Charles Cox, . 






Beverly, 


Milk (total solids, 11.12).' 


5 


Charles Cox, . 






Beverly, 


Milk (total solids, 11.17). 2 


6 


William P. Crowley, 






Needham, 


Milk (total solids, 10. 14) .',- 


7 


William P. Crowley, 






Needham, 


Milk (total solids, 10.40). 2 


8 


Hubert H. Hall, . 






Great Barrington, . 


Milk (total solids, 8.94) . l 


9 


Hubert H. Hall, 








Great BarriDgton, . 


Milk (total solids, 10.26). 1 


10 


Leonard Hamner, 








Monterey, 


Milk (total solids, 11.00). 1 


11 


Leslie G. Hill, 








Lowell, . 


Milk (total solids, 11.72). 2 


12 


John Parker, . 








Raynham, 


Milk (total solids, 11.06).' 


13 


John A. Porter, 








Woburn, 


Milk (total solids, 11.84). 


14 


John A. Porter, 








Woburn, 


Milk (total solids, 11.90). s 


15 


Michael Tristany, 








Lee, 


Olive oil, 90 per cent, cot- 








ton-seed oil. 


16 


Chas F. Lane, .... 


Tisbury, 


Tincture of iodine, 58 per 
cent. U.S. P. 



t Watered. 

Fines imposed, $375.50. 



Appealed. 



s Skimmed. 



192 













R 




B 




a 




B 






S 




a 


S 




a 










a 










5 




s 




CD 




CD 


Z 


CD 




c7 


CD 




c 


CD 




CD 




z 


CD 




CD 


5 








o 




o 




o 




U 


o 


O 




o 


CD 




o 


CD 




CD 




CD 


CD 




CD 


CD 








M 




M 




«H 




bl 


^ 


(i 




hi 


U 




u 


hi 




u 




IH 


hi 




hi 


hi 








CD 




CD 




CD 




CD 


o 


CD 




c 


CD 




gg 


CD 




CD 






CD 




c 


CB 








ft 




— 




Pi 




C< 


a. 


ft 




ft 


ft 




a. 


ft 




a. 




a. 


a. 




a. 


ft 








§3 




-1 




IC 

ia 




<a 
o 


o 
i- 


O 

co 




c 

CN 


O 
co 




c 
i- 


c 




o 

-r 




- 
a. 


c 
oc 




© 


© 




'3 

a! CD 




CO 




CO 




CO 




CO 


co 


T»i 




•*" 


ci 




eo" 


CO 




CO 




M 


co 




"»< 


■<# 


1 




09 




' — i 




4-^ 

03 




C3 


% 


tf 




eg 


-i-T 
cc 




jS 


ti 




tf 




•■a" 


c: 




J^ 


a. 


^> 


3 ? 




.. 




... 




.. 






.- 


•- 




r 


.- 




•- 


T 




•- 




**■ 


•• 




• - 


T 


as 

c 

< 

o 


tn a . 

O O .B 

c H *^ 


.B.B 

b a 

CD CD 

E-l H 
CO CO 


a 

CD 
CD 


— 


a 

CD 
O 


h 


a 

CD 

o 


t-^ 


a 

CD 


a 

CD 
CD 


a 

CD 
. CD 


^ 




. CD 

n w 


h 


c7 

CD 


CD 


a 


CD 
CD 


^ 


Z 

CD 


CD 

hi ° 


h 


cT 
c 


S 




S B co 
CD CD . 

° u Ph 


t-i 

CD 
ft 


CD 

a. 




(4 

CD 

a. 


03 


n CD 
CD +-> 
P.C3 


U 
CD 

— 


2 CD 

CC ft 


c. 


CD 


CD u 
S Cv 


- 

1 


CD 

a. 


CD ih 


i 

"cc 

is 


hi 


CC 


hi 
CD 

a. 


© hi 
tJ CD 


> 


B 


CD hi CD 

CCC-"~fCC 


M 


0-"0h 


g 


cc 


CD 


N rrt 


C 
-a 




5 


T3 :c 


^ 


r. 
■a 




>e 


IN 


— 


CD T? CO 


— 


© 


S CNT3 




hi hi • 






i 




CD 




CD 


. CD 






cc 




CD • 







CD • 


c 




5 




CD • 






CD • CD 




CD CD Xfl 


ajai 


O 








o 


TfCS 




rSci" 




Tl 


T3 C t3 C 


"O o 








a 






CM 


«£J«d 




ftft • 






■c 


iH 


■a 




^r 






r^ ^ 


— 


H 


73 i-i 


'T 




rc^ 




iH 












TS^tS 




oioP 

© CO . 


PP 


r§ 


03 

■c 


a" 


03 

■0 


/. 


CC 


ocT_. 


t3 




1 


00 


03 . 


73 


« 


'e3 - 


cc 


SO 


93 

— 


EO 


co" 


_- 


co" 


03-03 

— Mm 




"^ ^ B 


a a 




CD 




o 




i 


.a cd 




CD — 


■L 




cd .a 


OD 




£.« 


£ 




CD 




cd -a 


i. 




I .a -_ 














a 


































= o = 




CD CD CD 


CD CD 


o 




c 




o 


O.S 


: 


2 o 




C 


.£ o 




o 


.a © 




C 




z 


.a o 




" 




B S O 


CD CD 


CO 


gj 


CO 


e8 




5 


co ci 


CO 


03 co 


cC 


CO 


c3 CO 






CJ <*> 






S 






— 


QO 


— DD — 
























































o3 c3 s 










a 
c 




a 
c 


73 a 

5 o 
































a ~z a 
o ^j o 




4_j u U 

B S ft 


CD CD 

ft ft 


cj 


c 


e3 


03 


03 


1* 


c 


^; 


5 S 


C 


^; 


?,^ 


c 


- 


c 


^r 


bi- 


O 


cC 




O O „ 




O 


o 


O 


o 


O 


CD 


o u 


O 


o o 


CD 


o 


o o 


CD 


G 


CD o 


CD 


Z 


CD 


c 


CD o 


CD 


o 


CD o CD 




OO^ 


00 CO 

t-cc 


H 




H 




H 




H 


H 


H 




H 


H 




'c- 


H 




'- 




EH 


H 




H 


H 




o 


o 




















































T 
















n 


u 


















































PM 


Oh 






































































































CD 


CD 


















































'Si 


'3 
















































g 


• • £ 


• & 








































' 








o 


A 




















































4^ 


















































O 


.^d 


.-^ 














































B 






















































CO ° 


o 
















































c 


co rh 

o3 w 


& 






























CO 

CO 

e3 


















5 


_ fl 


i# 






_ 












CO 




















CO 
CO 




E0 


CO 




o (j S 
CO o o 

-^03 


. CD 

CD hi 

be© 


CO 
CO 

cd" 




CO 
X 

0^ 








CO 
CO 

03 




CO 

o3 






CO 

CO 






2 

"cd 

cB 

CO 




DO 
CS 

s 






1 

ar- 
cs 




1 

CD 

u 


•r. 

oc 


u 

9 


G ^ M 


Js M 


"o 




& 








B 
O 




CC 

CO 






r3 

C3 






£ 




o 






o 




cr 


-5 


<*5 

3 






w 

CO 

.13 




O 

CO 








M 




Ph 






O 

3 

^3 






CD 

te: 




CD 

o 






1 

CD 




o 




03 

o" 

1 


£28 
1 ~ 


a u ® a ° 
5 « .2 o o 

CD " CD * 

O -+= O co 

s-. a a ^ a 




O 

Pn 

a 

cS 

CO 








"co 

03 

t-T 

^3 
CD 
O 




CD 

a 

s 






CD 

a 






o3 
03 




CD 
CD 
P-. 








QQ 

o 


CD~ 

hi 

< 

Q 




S? § 


CD • M 






'o 

65 










fe 






1 






w 




< 






B 




a 


o 




S Q S 


CD hi 




3 








M 




,a 






>> 






B 




CO 






rt 




>> 


5 




1-2§ 

HOW 


EM « 


m CD 

03 




o 

a 








s 

H 

m 




o 
o 

03 

i-s 






U 

03 

w 






03 




CO 

a 
^- 






l 




CD 


o 


o. 

a 




n 

fl 


















• 






























08 




"CC CD 
















































a? 


• ® 


£<» 
















































o 


a .2 


S a 


















































B o 


* £ 
















































a> 


C „ea 


O ft 
















































o 


£?"*<-' 


«*— i **-t 
















































05 


10 c o 

CD X3 

•-5 CD +J 

ft> h, 

gOoQ 


o o 
















































A 


*e *e 


al 




M 








M 










jS 






;M 




;U 






;M 




Ji 


M 


O 


"SVS 

SQGQ 


1 




i 








S 




~ 
| 






1 






S 




i 






i 




i 


s 






















































-O. Q. 
i i 


.,03!zi 

© IB "* 

»n co © 


CD CO 






5C 








03 


— 


03 

OS 




03 


03 




03 


03 
t— 




CO 




CO 

to 


CO 

co 

CD 




03 






00 © 


cc 








o 




o 


c 


00 




CO 


t- 




BO 


O0 




* 




R 






z 


u*. 


55 cc 


o ■* •>* 


CO -f 






c 




-p 




■* 


-T 


Tt< 




-r 


Tl< 




-r 


■* 




a 














rH rH CN 


CI CI 


cr 




































o* 


a" 




rH 


o 



193 



a 


a 


a 




a 




a 


a 




a 




a 




a 






a 
















CD 


cd 


CO 




CD 




CD 


CD 




CD 




CD 




CO 




CD 


CD 




CO CO G> CD CD 




c 


CD 




Cv CD © 


o 


o 


CD 




u 




O 


O 




O 




CD 




CD 




O 


CD 




o o o a c 




53 


o 




O CD CD 


u 


H 


u 




EH 




IH 


(H 




tJ 




!H 




^ 




tH 


!-> 




t-< U u tn U 




-. 


u 




H M fa 


CD 


cd 


CD 




CD 




CD 


CD 




CD 




CD 




CD 




CD 


CD 




CD CD CD ® CD 




CD 


CD 




CD - CD 


ft 


ft 


ft 




ft 




ft 


ft 




ft 




ft 




ft 




ft 


ft 




ft Ph ft ft ft 




ft 


ft 




ft a. ft 


8 




o 
»o 




© 

rH 




O 


© 




O 
CI 




© 
(0 




o 
o 




O 


■* 




O © o "0 O 
-H tN -)< CO CC 




— 


•2 




S ft £ 


■*' 


CO 


CO 




CC 




co 


CO 




CO 




CO 




CO 




cc 


co 




CO CO CO : o cc 




M 


CO 




re cc cc 






o3 




HJ 










o9 

IH 






























CS 


e8 






oS 


gg 






cc; 










03 










cS 






«H 


■H 




>(H 




<H 


•-4-H 






IH 




^5 




VH 


«H 




*^H <4_, «TH t« 




"*" 


<~* 




%4 *r- «H 


*=• 


J 


H-i 




■ 




a 

CD 

° fa 


^ 




• 




+-> 




— 




^J 


■|H> 




-•-; *: ni *» *- 




w 


^ 




*i *i *J 


a 


a 


a 




a 




a 




a 




a 




d 




a 


a 




a a a = s 












CD 


CD 


. ® 




CD 




CD 




CD 




CD 






CD 


. ® 




CD CD CD © CD 




CD 


. ® 




'- . '- '- . 


° u 


o 


n o 


fc! 


CD 


fa 


CD 


u 


CD 


PH 


CD 


'f-i 


CD 

CD 


CD 


CD 


tH O 


tH 


OmOi-CJ-O^O 

M«M«t<SH5^ 


ij 


o 


M « 


^ 


O fa O fa O fa 


n« 


h 


2m 


D 


u 


CD 


u® 

s « 


fa 


CD 


t4 


CD 


u 


CD 


:-. 


2 >H 


CD 


s 


H 


* tH 


CD 


■-'-■-'-- 'z. 


© ^ 


cd 


03 CO 


ci 


CD 


o3 


CD 


r^ 


CD 


r-^ 


CD 






rt 
fee 


CD 


rt « 


rt 


CD r »CD,-'CD" i " J C- ; ^CD 




CD 


rt <S 




- rt £ -: i rt 


ft 


£ » 


£ 


ft 


Et 


& £ 


ft 


r* 


ft 


e= 


ft 


b 


ft 


ft 


l ft 


is 


ft c - c^j ; - cci. c3 c- ;' ^ 


r« 


ft 


fc ^ 


£ 


ft > -tj -> 


cc 'd 


S 


d;2 


TJ 


-* 


TJ 


-+ 1 -H 


o 

-H 


d 


to 

CO 


■d 


o 


d 


in 


d 


gjj 


^ 


— 


1 — | 


03 


■c; S 


— 


CO -4 o _, o _< 

r- ~ s i d cc "d 


• CD 




CD r "' 


CD 




CD 


• co 


CD 


i- 




COao 


CD 




CD . 


CD 


.CD . CD . co ' <D . 


CD 




co . 


£ 


CD . CD - CD 


rH T-J 




t3tH 


d 


« 


-CJO rg) 


O 


*■£ 


o 


■d 




-d 




■aoiJH 


d 


rH^CCirHrgJ,^— Or-JO 




C2 






— T. H -S — T5 


tHh-j 




^ rH TJ rH r d 


,-l 'drHi3 


rH 


d 




>d 


d. 


'd 




T3 rH 


"3 


Hr^HT-Hr-Hr-H 










rH r= r. r-; — r-; 


- 03 




cS .. 


CO 




e3 


.. 03 




cc: 




C3 




cc; 




rt 




03 _ 


rt 


-c4 .03 „c3 „o3 „ 












rS^ 


5 


_■ co 

®2 


d 

CD 




d 
CD 


M rrH 

2 © 


CO 

-a 


CD 


l 


d 

CD 


CO 

2 


CD 


GO 

2 


d 

CD 


CO 

d 


'drS 

CD .S 


-d 

C3 


co _, CO ^ CO __ co__ CO 

ra'drrH'd — 'd^-r-. 
.S CD .S CD .2 CD .S CD .S 


CC 


X 


— CO 


? 


'•0 r— '-o ^, CO _ 

.a c .a £ .d. t 


O -rH 


o 


2-3 


a 


o 


g 


o\2 


o 


C 


"o 


C3 


O 


H 


o 


a 


o 


.So 


2 


"o .2 "3 .2 "o -5 "o .2 "o 


~ 


"3 


a t 


— 


o •- "o .2 "c -S 


CO 03 


03 


o3 to 


3 


CO 


3 


co o3 


oc 


rt 


CO 


r-t 


CO 


rt 


CO 


rt 


CO 


rt co 


rt 


cOcS^rtcoccJCOrtco 




CO 


03 ^ 




"D rt '7- 'rt H3 rt 






+3 
















+3 












+3 
















« o 


"3 


o $ 


o 


3 


a 
o 


J o 


"3 


H 
o 


3 


a 
o 


3 


o 


03 


a 

o 




o s 


a 

o 


"75 o *p c h a73 pr3 


5 


"3 


§J 





ii 5 3 5 5 c 


O « 


o 


O o 


o 


o 


CD 


o » 


o 


CD 


o 


CD 


o 


CD 


o 


CD 


O 


O o 


CD 


ooooo © 1 - 1 © 


CD 


O 


O o 


CD 


O O o U 3 u 


H 


H 


H 




H 




H 


H 




H 




H 




H 




H 


H 




H H H H H 




H 


H 




H H H 




























































CO 

03 




















• 




















.. 








"3 






.- 














r 










CO 

CO 










CO 








h 






CO 














CO 

03 










cS 






r 




CO 

o3 








CD 

ft 
ft 






c3 






















a 






CO 



















h" 














^> 










CD 






C3 




,d 








a 
o 






CD 






























§ 




bo 
o 
o 












CO 














2 










c3 






CO 










CD 






3 














tH 

CD 
l> 

03 

w 










fe 






3 

h 

CD 




CD 














o 

CD 






















tH 

H 






+3* 




<! 








CD 






CO 














co" 










03 
O 






£j 




rd 








O 

tH 

o 






03 














fl 










>-s 






£ 




+3 

"3 

m 
w 












H 














CD 










fe 






02 

W 

CD 










Ph 

a 

c3 






GO 

CD 
























CD 

g 






bo 




a 














H 














is 










-a 

+3 

M 






O 


















o3 














"3 














CC 




tH 








j* 






J3 














e3 










c3 






O 




o 












o 














P 










w 










• 














• 






























j« 




M 








;-{ 






M 














jW 










rS 






































































































§ 




§ 








3 






k 














s 










s 




















































fc 


t- 


00 




o 




rH 


N 




rH 




CO 




IO 




CC 


T*1 




►z 5z Jz 

»« t- ^ ^ 




» 


izi 




r5 ^ r5 


CM' 


t- 


t- 




B! 




SS 


CT- 




CC 








CM 




CM 


•* 




•* ■*! CM -HH CD 




00 


© 




CM ■HH. © 


t- 


■* 


■HH 




"* 




•* 


tH 




co 




l-C 




IO 




IO 


IO 




IO JO rH rH rH 






CM 




CM CM CM 


CO 


o 


o 




O 




O 


O 








o 




o 




o 


o 




© © IO IO IO 




« 


>C 




iO >o »o 


CM 


iH 


rH 




rH 




rH 


rH 




— 




T-\ 




rH 




rH 


rH 




rH rH CN CM <M 




CN 


CM 




CM (M CM 



194 





a a a a c a a 




<X> CD CD CD CD CD © 




o o o o o o o 




u b (« h k h a 




-u L' ^ CD '~' CD Gj 




a ft_ft_ft_ft_ft_ft_ 




oo cd;^;©:^:cc;^o~:x — r. ^ 






eq <m' S n 9 *> S m 9 "- 1 a n 3 




« iT'ti J'd jj"^ ^^3 +a ^ +-T^ 




« .~ a- g- s -h s <« s -« a 


s 


5 


t t.§ *r.i *r a •: a t a •: a 


a 
< 








o 


fcSn^K^HPllWhWhB 




ojrtOjBiDaaia^aicaja 


3 


Di> ft JD ft CD AS Oil) ft CD ft CD 
•^ P O o o o o o 


« 


>Ocb.' 1> . < i ) cdcd co cd.cd 




^ 13 >-i ^o ft-^ ftr-i ft© P<rH ft 
T3 ,_l CO' H O rH b-' -1 '— 1 rH CO ^ CC 






- c4 .'-' -■<*i .CN -<N _co _?o 








TSTSr^eClrcJCCTSCCrQCOr^TOroCO 








o.S'o'2'o r,:! 'o' T3 'o'' :, 'o r;3 'o' T::) 

CO „j to "J CO -J CO 'J co "2 co •£ CO -J 




O^'oP'OP'OftoftoP'Oft 




H H H H H H H 




DQ 
03 




a 




of 














O 


CB 


s 
■a 
o 


ja 


£ 


a J . 


o 


_■ CO 

S oS w 
O! g a 


~3 
o 


d<3 jr S - - to 

rrt "3 tO CO * 

'03 m co SE m 

«« a " <s 2 S 
cl a co u i2 

W « -§ S % S a 


u 


. t3 Zt ^ « - a 
Qj >» << « 9 a >> 

ri W 5 M & & ^ 


"o 




13 a +d <c 


c 

a) 


| * ,3 s 1 £ 

CD ft - b- kL 


s 


o 


,a co Jrf -r a 
.3 • -S « 9 £ fc 

-g j O >~l CD > 

co a .^ _ a co 

CD CS *S ® CD ,a CD 


I 






— 1 .rt _ M n ft t 1 

^a S « 2 ja 
O t> n O cc i-» O 






o. 




s 




0) 




co 








o 




h 




*J 




<3 




M 




J3 


j< jil il Al J< J< a 


5 






g g 2 g a g s 




tf S CO H 


a o £ 


00 n * ^ t- a 

O Tf 00 05 CD CD CD 

co co co co co co 


fc co 


© © © 10 "\ _ _, 




?; t-h 1-1 r-i cr cr 1 cr 1 



19.' 



INSPECTION OF DAIRIES. 



During the month of September, 1909, 228 dairies were examined 
in the following places : — 



Number 
examined. 



Number found 

to present 

no Objectionable 

Features. 



Number to 

which Letters 

were sent. 



Boxford, . 

Second inspection, 
Danvers, 

Second inspection, 
Gloucester, 

Second inspection, 
Hamilton, 

Second inspection, 

Third inspection, 
Middleton, 

Second inspection, 
Peabody, 

Second inspection, 
Rockport, 
Topsfield, 

Second inspection, 
Wenham, 

Second inspection, 

Third inspection, 



2 
10 

9 
39 

21 
51 



11 

1 

16 

11 

23 
2 

19 
4 



4 
27 
11 
31 

7 
1 

9 

1 

14 

5 

12 
2 

11 
2 



50.00 
70.00 
44.44 
69.23 
52.38 
60.78 

87.50 
100.00 

81.82 

100.00 

87.50 

45.45 

52.17 

100.00 

57.89 

50.00 



1 

3 

5 

12 

in 
20 



6 

11 



50.00 
30.00 
55.56 
30.77 
47.62 
39.22 

12.50 



18.18 



12.50 
54.55 



47.83 



42.11 

50.00 



Total number of dairies examined, 228 

Number found to be free from objectionable conditions, 145 

Number to which letters were sent, 83 

Total number of conditions to which attention was called, 258 

Percentage of dairies which passed inspection, 63.60 

In addition to the above, 88 dairies were visited at which the sale 
of milk had been discontinued. 

The names of the owners of dairies found to be worthy of commenda- 
tion follow : — 

Boxford. 

Dunleigh, Henry * Moore, Charles Perley, Henry * 

Hooper Bros.* Parkhurst, John "W.* Twisden, J. T.* 

Killham, Frank * Perley, Charles * 



Armstrong, Joseph 
Baker, Charles * 
Bradstreet, A.*t 
Burrows, A. T. 
Connors, Daniel * 
Currier, W. J.*t 



Danvers. 

Dodge, George W.* 
Endicott, William C.*t 
Gould, Austin L.* 
Hayes, Herbert A.* 
Hill, A. M * 
Hussey, E. 0.*t 



Ingalls, H. A.* 
Jacobs, "W. A.*t 
Kimball, F. 0*1 
Learoyd, B.*t 
McDonald, T.*f 
Mudge, A. H.*t 



* Second inspection. 



t Reported favorably on first inspection. 



196 



Nangle, James * 
0'Neil,T.H,*t 
Palmer, Thomas * 
Pitnam, Emery 
Pope, Daniel *t 



Andrews, Epbraim *t 
Andrews, J. W.* 
Andrews, Mary B.*t 
Babson, M. L.*t 
Barnard, George K.*t 
Cole, T. & Co.*t 
Davis, Sarah *t 
Day, Edward * 
Day, Eugene I. 
Dunbar, J. W. 
Friend, Albert H.* 
Hagstrom, Peter 
Harvey, Charles *t 
Haskell, L* 



Pratt, George * 
Preston, Charles * 
Putnam, Alfred *t 
Putnam, John M.*t 

Gloucester. 

Hibbard, Frank W * 

James, George *t 

Kerr, Robert 

Kleinolia, G. 

Lane, G. E.*t 

Lane, H. P.*t 

Lane, H. "W.* 

Lawrence, James * 

Lufkin, Edward S *t 

Lufkin, F. H* 

McCormick, Mrs. "William *f 

Middleton, John 

Monson, Austin *t 

Murray, Charles 



Putnam, J. Warren * 
Rogers, D. P. 
Sears, George B.* 
Wentworth, James L.*t 



Nelson, John E.*t 
Nelson, William 
Nutting, John *t 
O'Brien, John * 
Pollard, Mrs.* 
Pomeroy, Edward * 
Rice, Edward 
Riggs, L. 

Robertson, James * 
Towle, William *t 
"Williams, Matt 
Young, Charles * 
Younger, Edward *t 
Younger, William t 



Adams, George "W.J 
Berry, Fred *f 
Cilley, Dr. O. G.*t 



Hamilton. 

Knowlton, Isaac F.* 
Marshall, Frank * 
Stone, John B.* 



Whipple, C. E ' 
Whipple, Emerson A. 



Averill & Doyle * 
Berry, William *t 
Fuller, John P.* 



Middleton. 

Harden, Harlin * 
Hutchinson, E. S.*t 
Jones, John * 



Phillips, B. F.i 
San ford, J. B.*f 
Wilkins, G. P." 



Berry, William T.*j 
Bushby, P.* 
Gilmore, M. J.*t 
Goodale, J. O* 
Mclntyre, Frank *f 



Peabody. 

Newhall, F. L.* 
Parker, N. W.*t 
Pitnam, T. L.*t 
Room, J. H. 

Sanders, Charles *1 



Southwick, Daniel B.*i 
Stanley, Frank *t 
Trask, J. A.*t 
"Webster, Dr. J.*| 
Williams, Charles G.*t 



Evans, William H. 
Hodskins, W. B.* 
Lane, Arthur W.* 
Lane, Charles * 



Pod' port. 

Nelson, Peter 
Pearson, Andrew 
Poole, John J.*t 
Poole, Joseph *t 



Poole, Nathaniel 
Smith, George E. 
Stevens, Scott 



Cass, Mrs. F. F.* 

Con ant, D.* 

Jordan, C. F.*t 

Lamson, Estate of J. A.*t 



Topsfield. 

Merideth, J. M*t 
Peabody, Estate of Alden P.* 
Pierce, T. W.*t 
Pike, B. P.* 



Pingree, David < 
Rust, F. W.*t 
Towne, Frank H.* 
Williams, Harry *f 



* Second inspection. 



f Reported favorably on first inspection. | Third inspection. 






197 



Barnes, Thomas 
Burn ham, A.*t 
Cole, E. W.*t 
Dodge, Elbridge * 
Dodge, William P.*t 



Wcnham. 
Johnson, Frank * 
Johnson, W. H.*t 
Perkins, N. P.*t 
Pingree, Mrs. H. E.*f 
Porter, Mrs. A.* 



Preston, D.W.J 
Putnam, W. S.«t 
Stillman, Henry J 
Tarr, Mrs. F. H.* 
Trefy, Charles 



FACTS RELATING TO DAIRIES SUPPLYING MILK FOR 
PUBLIC SALE IN FALL RIVER. 



During the month of September, 50 dairies supplying milk for public 

sale in Fall River were examined, of which 34 are situated in Rhode 
Island. 

The usual method of handling milk was as follows : the c-ows were 
milked into large, open tin pails; the milk was strained through a brass 
strainer, and generally through cheese cloth, in a little milk house, 
kitchen or in the yard near the well; the milk was then cooled, either 
by putting the cans in tubs of water or by sinking them in the well. 

While it was understood that the milk cans were to be returned clean, 
it Mas not uncommon for the farmers to say that they often did not 
smell clean and that they had to be washed again. Moreover, the in- 
vestigation disclosed the fact that the outside of the cans was always 
dirty, and that the inside frequently did not look or smell clean. Stop- 
pers were often dirty. Empty cans thrown by the roadside were cov- 
ered with dust by the time the farmer received them. The cans were 
so mixed that those received by A to-day might go to B to-morrow. The 
milk teams Avere not so clean as they should be. 

The Rhode Island dairies yielded the following data : the cows were 
frequently found in dark, dirty, damp, dingy barn cellars, sometimes 
with horses, but more often the horses were on the floor directly above 
the cows. Other barns were little more than sheds. A few gave evi- 
dence of having been whitewashed at some time, and were fairly light, 
but even in these, cows and horses were kept together side by side. or. 
sometimes, directly opposite one another. 

The manure appeared to be thrown out the nearest door or window, 
and to cover considerable area. 

The milk room, a small building, was generally within 10 feet of the 
barn. It was not screened and flies were abundant. While stoppers 
were removed from empty cans to " let them air," previous to pouring in 
the milk, flies crawled into the cans, often coming directly from the 



* Second inspection. 



t Reported favorably on first inspection. % Third inspection. 



198 

barn, barnyard or near-by privy. This was a common occurrence, even 
immediately previous to rilling the cans with milk. 

In several cases the barn, milk room, privy and well were within a 
30-foot radius. In one case the privy was in the barn cellar, within 15 
feet of the cows. In most instances the soil was sandy, and it seemed 
that well pollution from the barn or privy, or both, was inevitable. In 
one case water was used from a spring which was in the barn cellar, 3 
feet from and 3 feet below a large pigpen containing 8 pigs. Within 
15 feet were the cow stalls, while horses were on the floor above. The 
privies, too frequently near water supplies, were, without exception, 
filthy. The old-fashioned dirt vault, which in some instances was so 
shallow as not to constitute a vault, was the custom; the baseboards 
were frequently loose, open or cracked; the seats were uncovered and 
the doors open. Entrance into one of these privies always aroused 
swarms of flies. 

Surface sink drains and dirty garbage buckets were sometimes noted 
not far from the barnyards, and these were frequently untidy. 

Most of the dairymen were said to use no water on the hands or udders 
before milking. 

The 16 Massachusetts dairies visited were clean, light and airy, and 
as a rule had whitened walls. The manure was generally piled at one 
end of the yard and not scattered, and the yards were clean. 

The milk rooms were clean, and although not screened did not con- 
tain many liies, due, perhaps, to the fact that the doors were kept closed. 
The privy was in no instance near the milk room. 

The water supply was generally from a closed well supplied with a 
windmill ; most farmers had two wells, one for the house and one for 
the barn. With but few exceptions there was no apparent well pollution. 

The privies were sometimes in the house, with hard dirt or brick 
vaults; when outside they were generally properly constructed. 

The examination of the 50 dairies showed that the least favorable 
sanitary conditions noted among the Massachusetts dairies Avere better 
than the most favorable conditions noted in the neighboring State of 
Ehode Island. 



TYPHOID FEVER OUTBREAK AT JEFFERSON, MASS. 



On September 21 there was reported from Dorchester a case of typhoid 
fever that gave a history of having spent Labor Day at a hotel at Jef- 
ferson, Mass. On September 22, a case from Cambridge and on Sep- 
tember 23 a case from East Boston was reported that gave a similar 



199 

history. About this same time several other people, who had S] 
Labor Day at this hotel in Jefferson, appeared at the Boston City and 

Carney hospitals sick with typhoid fever. An invest ig;M ion of the 
source of these cases was immediately begun. 

Among the Labor Day guests at the Mount Pleasant House in Jeffer- 
son, 59, or a few less than a tenth of the guests, were found to be in- 
fected with typhoid fever. The distribution of these cases was as 
follows : - — 

Boston : 

Brighton, . ... . . . . . . . .1 

Charlestown, 4 

Dorchester, IS 

East Boston, 6 

Roxbury, 5 

South Boston, . 2 

36 

Blackstone, ............ 1 

Brookline, 1 

Cambridge, 6 

Somerville, 1 

Waltham, 1 

Worcester, 4 

Pawtucket, R. I., 2 

Providence, R. I., ........... 6 

New Haven, Conn., 1 

Total, 59 

These 59 cases were distributed among 52 households. The age 
periods of the cases was as follows : — 

Under 10 years, 1 

11 to 15 years, 7 

16 to 20 years, 14 

21 to 25 years, 15 

26 to 30 years, 11 

31 to 35 years, 6 

35 to 40 years, 3 

Over 40 years, ............ 1 



53 



All of these cases spent a part of Sunday, September 5. and Monday. 
September 6, Labor Day, at the hotel together. Some of the guests 
came on Sunday and others left on Monday. 



200 

The meals taken in common by 19 of these guests, who came late or 
lell early, are as follows: — 

Sunday, September 5: — 

Breakfast, 1,5 

Dinner, ig 

Supper, 19 

Monday, September 6 : — 

Breakfast, 10 

Dinner, ............ 14 

Supper, ............ 9 

Tuesday, September 7 : — 

Breakfast, ............. 3 

No cases of typhoid fever have been reported among guests of the 
hotel who left on or before Sunday, September 5, or who arrived at 
the hotel on or subsequent to Monday morning, September 6. 

The incidence of morbidity among the infected cases is shown graph- 
ically in the accompanying chart. 




6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 21 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 I 2 3 4 5 6 

Sept. 1909 Oct. 

Incidence of Cases ok Trpiioin Fever as contracted at Jefferson, Mass., on Sept- 

6, 1909. 

Enquiry among the cases showed that they did not arrive or leave 
at the same time; that they were not a closely associated group, apart 
from the other hotel guests: that they had not been off on any expedi- 
tion ..!' party where they could have gotten food from outside the hotel. 



201 

No evidence was found to suggest thai infection of the cases bad ta 
place outside of the hotel. Investigation of the conditions at the hotel 

showed the following facts. 

The Mount Pleasant House is admirably situated on high ground 
overlooking the town of Jefferson. The sewage from the bote! drains 
off into a valley and is there well taken care of by filter beds. There 
was no evidence of any break in the sewerage system or contamination 
of the hotel water supply. The water used by the hold came from 
two sources. The hotel is supplied with the same water as the towns 
of Jefferson and llolden. This water was causing no typhoid fever 
among the people in the villages. In front of the hotel is a well, which 
was frequently used as drinking water by the hotel guests. During the 
summer this water had caused no sickness. Examination of the water 
showed no evidence of sewage contamination. 

The fresh vegetables used, at the hotel were supplied by a large whole- 
sale dealer in Worcester. No evidence was found to show that the 
lettuce or celery used had been irrigated with sewage, or that thesi 
vegetables were causing any typhoid fever in other localities. 

The milk furnished the hotel came from three sources. A small 
amount of it was produced on the place. No evidence of fever past or 
present was found among the stable men, and no source of pollution 
of the milk at the stable was noted. Another portion of the milk was 
obtained from two farms not far from the hotel. The sanitary condi- 
tions at these farms were not of the best or above criticism, but no past 
or present history of typhoid fever was found at either of them. The 
bulk of the milk was obtained from the milk train of a large Boston 
milk contractor. No typhoid fever was discovered among the farms 
furnishing this milk, and no fever was being caused by this same milk 
when brought down to Boston and mixed with the milk of the con- 
tractor's general supply. 

Investigation among the past and present employees of the hotel 
showed that at the time of the investigation no one at the hotel was 
sick or had been recently sick with any fever suggesting typhoid fever. 
Among the past employees two maids were reported sick. One of these 
maids had been at the hotel from July 3 to September 6. when she 
returned to her home, seemingly in excellent health. She taught school 
for ten days, and then began, on September 17, to have a headache. On 
September 21 she went to bed, and on September 25 showed a positive 
Widal test. No reason was found to show that this maid had been 
infected before the general infection at the hotel, or that she had been 
the source of the outbreak. The other maid reported sick left the 
hotel September 9. At that time she was feeling pretty thoroughly 



202 

tired out. Saturday night, two days later, she complained of consid- 
erable thirst, and on Sunday morning she woke with a bad headache. 
When seen by a doctor an Wednesday, September 15, she had a tem- 
perature of 102.5, which two days later reached 103.8. The Widal 
reaction was found to be positive on September 22. On September 24 
she was sent to St. Vincent's Hospital in Worcester. On September 28 
her temperature reached normal, and remained so during an uneventful 
convalescence. 

This case antedates by a period of from one day to two weeks all the 
cases supposed to have been infected at Jefferson. As it is possible for 
a case of typhoid fever to be a source of infection for ten days or two 
weeks before the onset of symptoms, there seems to be no reason why 
this maid, whose symptoms began September 11 or earlier, should not 
have been a source of infection on September 5, six days previous. 

Inquiry as to the mode in which the food at the hotel might have 
been infected by this suspected maid disclosed the following facts : — 

The bulk of the milk used at the hotel arrives at the Jefferson sta- 
tion at 8 a.m. Part of this milk is used by the late breakfast guests the 
morning of its arrival. A part of the milk that is unused during the 
day is kept and supplied to some of the guests the subsequent morning. 
When the hotel is crowded, the quantity of milk used is greater than 
can be stored in the hotel ice chest. Consequently some of the milk is 
left standing in the cans uniced during the night. The milk is trans- 
ferred from the cans to pitchers with the help of long-handled ladles 
or dippers. These dippers are often dropped back into the cans and 
sometimes lost in the cans. The pitchers are filled by the several table 
maids, and are then placed directly on the tables or on sideboards, from 
which glasses are filled. The maid from whom the infection may have 
come was very fond of milk. For supper she was accustomed to have 
merely milk and cakes. The milk then used may have been taken from 
a partly used pitcher from the hotel supper table, from a pitcher filled 
by this or another maid for the servants' table, or from a glass filled by 
this maid directly from one of the cans. This maid also was accustomed 
— contrary to the rules — to get a glass of milk at bedtime. This drink 
of milk may have been from a glass filled from one of the cans or it 
may have been directly from the dipper. This maid seemingly had 
excellent opportunities to infect the milk, either directly by dipping 
her hands into it, or indirectly by polluting with her hands or mouth 
a dipper which was dropped back into the milk can. 

Among the cases of typhoid fever thought to have been contracted 
at Jefferson, 45, or 77 per cent, of the 58 cases seen, drank the milk; 
5, or 9 per cent., had cream on cereals or fruit; and 8, or 14 per cent., 



203 

had milk or cream in tea, coffee or cocoa: 100 per cent, of the 54 cases 
examined among 58 cases reported to have contracted typhoid fever at 
the Mount Pleasant House drank the milk, or had it on cereals or fruit, 
or in tea, coffee or cocoa. One case that v - _ test at the hotel from 
August 10 to September 7 is said to have overslept on the morning 
of Labor Day and to have had no breakfast. With this one exception 
all the cases of typhoid fever thought to have been exposed to infection 
at Jefferson probably partook of the milk served to the hotel guests on 
the morning of Labor Da}', September 6. 

The vicarious manner in which the infection was distributed among 
the guests seemingly is explained in part by the varying susceptibility 
of different individuals, and in part by the way in which the contents 
of one of the cans of milk used was distributed here and there among 
the guests in pitchers and individual glasses. 

Conclusions. 

1. The Jefferson typhoid outbreak was milk borne. 

2. At the time the infection took place a table maid was employed at 
the hotel who was capable of causing the infection. 

3. This maid had ample opportunity to infect a portion of the milk 
supplied at the hotel. 

4. The infection of the milk probably took place Sunday afternoon 
or evening. 

5. The polluted milk, after standing improperly iced all night, was 
thoroughly infected when served at breakfast the next morning. 

6. With but one exception, all the eases infected were said to have been 
present at breakfast on the morning of Labor Pay, September 6, 

7. One hundred per cent, of the people thought to have been infected 
with typhoid fever at the Mount Pleasant House used milk at the hotel in 
one form or another. 



THE STATE OP KANSAS AND THE COMMON DRINKING CUP. 



The following resolution was adopted recently bj the Kansas State 
Board of Health: — 

Whereas, It has been repeatedly demonstrated thai the use of what is 
usually known as the common drinking owp is dangerous, ami is an un- 

doubted source of communication of infectious diseases, now, therefore] in 

the interest of the public health. 



204 

Be it ruled by the Kansas Stale Board of Health: 

That t lie use of the common drinking cup on railroad trains, in railroad 
stations, in the public and private schools and the State educational insti- 
tutions of the State of Kansas is hereby prohibited, from and after Sept. 
L, L909. 

No person or corporation in charge of or control of any railroad train. 
or station, or public or private school, or State educational institution shall 
furnish any drinking cup for public use, and no such person or corporation 
shall permit on said railroad train, or station, or at said public or private! 
school, or State educational institution, the common use of the drinking cup. 



RESIGNATION AND APPOINTMENT. 



Dr. Herbert C. Emerson of Springfield, State Inspector of Health 
of District No. 14, submitted his resignation to the Governor early in 
August. Dr. James V. W. Boyd of Springfield was appointed to fill 
the vacancy, and the appointment was confirmed by the Governor's 
Council on September 8. 



SHAW'S MALT: PROHIBITION OF SALE REMOVED. 



This preparation, as now presented to the trade, being properly la- 
beled, may be sold at retail. 



&, '**/& $ 



MONTHLY til BULLETIN 



OF THE 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH 



OF 



MASSACHUSETTS. 



An official publication of the State Board of Health of Massachusetts, issued monthly 
from the office of the Board, 145 State House, Boston, Ma'ss. 



New Series. OCTOBER, 1909. Vol.4. No. 10. 



Entered at the Post-office at Boston, Feb. 15, 1906, as Second-class Matter. Act 

of July 16, 1894. 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. 



HENRY P. WALCOTT, M.D., Cambridge, Chairman. 



JULIAN A. MEAD, M.D., Watertown. 
HIRAM F. MILLS, G.E., LAWRENCE. 
GERARD C. TOBEY, Esq., Wareham. 



JAMES W. HULL, Pittsfield. 
CHARLES H. PORTER, QuiNCY. 
ROBERT W. LOVETT, M.D., Boston. 



MARK W. RICHARDSON, M.D., Secretary. 



BOSTON: 

WEIGHT & POTTEE PEINTING CO., STATE PEINTEES, 

18 Post Office Square. 

1909. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



Page 

Weekly returns of deaths from cities and towns of more than 10,000 population, . 207 

Weekly returns of deaths from certain infectious diseases, 212 

Weekly returns of cases of infectious diseases, 213 

Monthly report on inspection of food and drugs, ....... 214 

Prosecutions for violations of the law relating to food and drugs 215 

List of adulterated foods, etc., for Octoher, 1909, 216 

Inspection of dairies, 218 

Anterior poliomyelitis, 219 

Prohibition of sale of Joyce's Brand Superior Malt, 219 

What is diseased meat, and what is its relation to meat inspection 220 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CITIES AND TOWNS 
OF MORE THAN 10,000 POPULATION. 



Week bnding Oct. 2, 1909. 



Recapitulation. 





33 


c 


i 




DXATBfl 


FROM 












u 

















~ vt 


u. 






c 




CITIES AND TOWNS. 


ll 


q 


"3 


~c. 


= i 




3 








*3«e 


•o 


~" «j 


J d . 


►Jg 


« 


«/ 


— Urn 


^ 




03 0> 


2^ 










J3 




^ 






t. o 


C s 




'w 5 












S «l 


c a 


■£ V 


S Z «° 




^ 


a 








&a 


g-S 


o>i 


£ £ « 


ofl 


% 




£. 






0- 


83 


« 


£ 


< 


a. 


z. 


ۥ' 


J? 


Boston, 


624,491 


183 


53 


64 


11 


19 


2 


3 




Worcester, 








136,476 


37 


17 


7 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


39 


25 


24 


2 


2 


- 


1 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


20 


7 


10 


2 


3 


- 


1 


- 


Lowell, 








96,1580 


30 


13 


6 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


34 


10 


17 


4 


6 


- 


1 


- 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


30 


5 


2 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


19 


2 


6 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


24 


14 


16 


- 


o 


1 


1 


- 


Somerville, 








76,049 


14 


4 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


11 


2 


4 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


21 


8 


8 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


10 


3 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


— 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


7 


3 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


6 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


11 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


9 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


— 


- 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


10 


6 


2 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


8 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


— 


Quincy, 








31,937 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


9 


3 


5 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


5 


2 


2 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


6 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


4 


2 














North Adams, 








22,150 


12 


4 


5 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


4 


1 














Chicopee, . 








21.049 


6 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


6 


1 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


8 


1 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


4 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


8 


1 


4 


- 


3 


- 




- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


4 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


9 


2 


5 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


5 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


2 


1 














Clinton, 








13,105 


4 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


6 


3 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, 








12,722 


3 

















Watertown, 








12,676 


4 

















Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


2 





1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


4 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


1 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster. . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


1 


1 














Greenfield, 








10,140 


1 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,379,468 



655 


223 


208 


31 


56 


6 


11 



i The populations were estimated upon the rate of growth from 1P00 to 1905. Those of Taunton, 
Gloucester, North Adams and Clinton were allowed to stand as in 1905, having shown no increase 
during the live-year period. The gain in the population of Lowell is due to the annexation of a 
part of the town of Tewkshury. The population of Lawrence by the census of 1905 was 70,050, but, 
owing to the building of the new Wood and Arlington mills, an increase of about S.000 is estimated 
by the Lawrence Board of Health, or 7S.000. 



208 



Week knding Oct. 9, 1909. 





■6 


S 


> 




Deaths 


PROM 








"s 


£ 


£ 


















« 


V 


■ ^ 


ta 






^ 




CITIES AND TOWNS. 


3 <2 


P 




"z 


s . 
3 S 




a 


> 






•S_ 


■O 


• 


"3 3 . 


J» 


00 


S 


2 fc 








~-= 




— Z X 






Q 








"3 » 


J? <J 


g a 


*0 w ** 


- K 


"22 




e 


QD 




S-a 


g-w 


!£ 




ga 


A 


O. 


a. 


9 




c 


« 


e 


£ 


<: 




s 


£ 


£ 


Boston, 


(324,491 


201 


56 


61 


13 


10 


2 


6 




Worcester, 








136,476 


43 


15 


11 


5 


3 


- 


1 


_ 


Fall River, 








106,486 • 


45 


28 


24 


2 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


24 


5 


12 


1 


8 


- 


1 


_ 


Lowell, 








96,380 


34 


15 


6 


1 


3 


_ 


- 


_ 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


37 


25 


11 


4 


o 


- 


3 


- 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


19 


5 


2 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


24 


7 


4 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


25 


« 


11 


3 


4 


- 


- 


- 


Somerville, 








76,049 


15 


5 


3 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


14 


3 


4 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


17 


11 


11 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


10 


6 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


6 


2 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


5 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


11 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


7 


1 


3 


- 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, . 








34,263 


7 


3 


3 


2 


- 


-' 


1 


- 


Everett, . 








33,597 


10 


5 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


7 


4 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


17 


3 


4 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


10 


6 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfleld, . 








27,932 


7 


4 


4 


3 


- 


- 


— 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


9 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 




- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


7 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


9 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


5 


4 j 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


5 


1 


o 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 





— 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


3 





2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


6 


3 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, 








14,522 


4 


1 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


8 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


3 


- 


- 


- 


— 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


5 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


2 


o 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, . 








12,722 


2 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown , 








12,676 


4 


1 I 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


4 


? 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


3 


3 


3 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


5 


1 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


5 


"| 


2 


_ 


1 


- 


1 


— 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,365,555 693 244 207 | 49 49 4 16 



209 



Week ending Oct. 16, 1909. 





i 


a 


s 




IIKATIIS 


KBOM 








Wei 

i 


OS 

a 


s 

a 














CITIES AND TOWNS. 


= i 


= 2 




* 


u 
9 

> 






OS V 

a es 

o c 




■z 3 

a.* 


o-o » 




s 


3 

Q. 


o 

SI 

a 


m 

r 
= 




a. 


» 


c 




•< 




- 


6- 


7. 


Boston, 


624,401 


181 


47 


58 


10 


21 


2 


5 




Worcester, 








136,476 


29 


7 


5 


1 


1 


- 


_ 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


54 


30 


24 


5 


1 


1 


2 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


27 


4 


10 


2 


5 


- 


1 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


34 


13 


12 


5 


5 


1 


- 


- 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


43 


17 


18 


3 


4 


- 


_ 


_ 


Lynn,. 








84,623 


26 


7 


6 


2 


1 


1 


- 


_ 


Springfield, 








84,237 


30 


10 


15 


4 


4 


- 


2 


1 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


25 


15 


9 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Somerville, 








76,049 


15 


3 


6 


1 


- 


- 


2 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


6 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


13 


4 


3 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


7 


1 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


7 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newton , 








39,642 


10 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


11 


4 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


7 


4 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


10 


6 


5 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


6 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


6 


1 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


15 


4 


3 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


13 


5 


2 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


3 


1 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


1 


Brook line, . 








26,674 


7 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


9 


2 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


_ 


North Adams, 








22,150 


7 


2 


2 




- 


- 


1 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


7 


1 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


5 


3 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Med ford, . 








20,921 


2 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


9 


1 


3 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


3 


2 


2 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


9 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


4 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


4 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


8 


4 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


3 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


3 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


4 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


2 





1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Milford, . 








12,722 


3 


2 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


1 





- 


- 


' - 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


4 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


2 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


1 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


3 


- 


~ 


- 


~~ 


- 


- 


- 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,379,468 



687 223 217 



I I 
49 59 8 



17 2 



210 



Week biding Oct. 23, 1909. 





- 


~ 


; 




Deaths 


PBOM — 




8 


m 














• ^ 


be 






u 






• b. 














■ 




CITIES AND TOWNS. 


§2 




1 


— T 


= s 




2 


> 
« 






- q 


t ■ 




« S 






3 


2"*" 






= -_ 






— r. 


















g! 


5ti 


-l 


£ 


2 


— 

s. 


- 






M 


a 


- 


<~ 


- 


~ 


p 


? 


Boston, 


824,491 


202 


59 


80 


16 


27 


3 1 9 


1 


Worcester, 








1:56,476 


33 


9 


9 


5 


2 


2 


_ 


Fall River, 








106,486 


42 


23 


16 


5 


2 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


21 


6 


12 


5 


4 


- 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


27 


12 


8 


3 


1 


3 


_ _ 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


37 


14 


17 


3 


1 


1 


1 - 


Lynn,. 








84,62:', 


23 


4 


4 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


Springfield, 








84,2:-t7 


24 


6 


8 


2 


1 


1 


1 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


31 


16 


13 


3 


3 


3 


1 1 


Somerville, 








76,049 


17 


3 


7 


1 


4 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


12 


1 


3 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


7 


5 


5 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


20 


7 


6 


2 


3 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








10,080 


8 


3 










- - 


Newton, 








39.642 


5 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 




Salem, 








39,019 


9 


2 


2 


- 


2 




_ 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


12 


3 


4 


1 


2 




_ 


Fitch burg, . 








34,263 


10 


4 


2 


1 


- 




- 


Everett, 








33,597 


6 


3 


- 


- 


- 




- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


9 


4 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


20 


6 


10 


2 


1 


- 


2 - 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


5 


2 












Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


6 


3 












Brookline, . 








26,674 


8 


- 


2 


1 


- 


- 


1 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


2 


- 












North Adams, 








22,150 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- - 


Northampton, 








21,075 


6 


1 












Chicopee, . 








21,049 


3 


3 












Med ford, . 








20.921 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


Beverly, 








16,:i86 


6 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


2 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 




- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


2 

















Newburyport, 








14,834 


5 


- 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


4 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weatfield, . 








14,780 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


3 


1 










- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


8 


3 


3 


- 


- 


3 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


2 


1 


1 


1 


- 




- 


- 


A darns, 








13.685 


3 


1 


3 


2 


1 




- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


5 


- 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


4 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Mil ford, . 








12.722 


o 


1 












Water town, 








12,676 


: j , 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,703 


2 

















Framingham, 








11,749 


4 


- 


3 


- 


2 


1 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,820 





- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


4 


- 


~ 


- 


- 




- 


- 



Total of reporting towns, 



Hi capitulation. 



2,379,468 670 L'll 



230 



62 61 19 



211 



Week ending Oct. 30, 1909. 





, 


B 


s 
















«5 


"*■ 


iC 




DEATH! 


BOM 








w 8 


2 


m 














CITIES AND TOWNS. 


^•3 


a 
3 

Q 

"3 
- — 


h 

•a 

a 
= 


"3 - . 


M 
C 

3 " 

1 




a 


■ 


« 






U. u 


■= a 




e J» 






o 






- S3 


tj>£ 






ga 


2 


— 

— 




i 




e. 


X 


a 


£ 


•< 




5 


P 


^ 


Boston, 


624,491 


197 


39 


55 


17 


17 


3 


4 




Worcester, 








136,476 


34 


- 


12 


7 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


Fall River, 








106,486 


35 


17 


7 


4 


- 


1 


2 


_ 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


25 


5 


8 


1 


3 


1 


1 


_ 


Lowell, 








96,380 


32 


10 


12 


3 


6 


1 


_ 


_ 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


25 


11 


11 


2 


4 


- 


1 


_ 


Lynn, 








84,623 


18 


3 


4 


- 


4 


- 


- 


_ 


Springfield, 








84,237 


21 


8 


7 


3 


1 


1 


1 


- 


Lawrence, 








78,000 


18 


10 


8 


1 


1 


1 


1 


_ 


Sonierville, 








76,049 


16 


5 


9 


2 


3 


- 


1 


_ 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


8 


2 


3 


2 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


26 


6 


7 


2 


1 


1 


1 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


8 


1 


2 


1 


— 


1 


_ 


_ 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


10 





1 


- 


1 


- 


_ 


_ 


Newton, 








39,642 


6 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Salem, 








39,019 


16 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, 








38,362 


14 


2 


5 


2 


- 


1 


1 


- 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


10 


3 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


6 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


9 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


.- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


16 


5 


5 


3 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


4 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


6 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


8 


2 


2 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


10 


3 


4 


2 


- 


1 




- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


8 


4 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Med ford, . 








20,921 


4 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, . 








16,386 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


6 


- 


3 


- 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


5 


- 


4 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


5 


1 


1 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


3 


2 


1 


1 




- 


- 


- 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


3 





1 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


3 


1 


2 


- 




1 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


3 


2 


1 


1 




- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


1 


- 


1 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


7 


1 


1 


- 




- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


5 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, . 








12,722 


6 


1 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


3 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, 








10,520 


3 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


4 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


~ 


Rccapi 


tulatit 


m. 














Total of reporting towns, 


2,379,468 


673 


161 


194 


64 


57 


16 


17 


- 



212 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CERTAIN INFECTIOUS 

DISEASES. 



Deaths from Infectious Diseases not specifically mentioned in 
above Tables during the Weeks of Oct. 2, 9, 16, 23 and 30, 1909. 





Place. 


Week ending — 


DISEASE. 


Oct. 2. 


Oct. 9. 


Oct. 16. 


Oct. 23. 


Oct. 30. 


Cerebro-spinal meningitis, 


Chelsea, 
Hyde Park, 
Lowell, 
Lynn, . 
Marlborough, 
Worcester, . 


1 
1 

1 
2 


2 


1 
1 




1 


Scarlet fever, .... 


Boston, 
Fitchburg, . 
Holyoke, 
Lowell, 
Maiden, 
Waltham, . 


1 
1 

1 


2 

1 

1 


2 
1 


1 
1 


2 


Whooping cough, 


Boston, 
Brockton, . 
Cambridge, 
Fitchburg, . 
Haverhill, . 
Holyoke, 
Lawrence, . 


1 
1 


1 
1 


1 

1 


- 




Erysipelas, .... 


Boston, 
Northampton, 


1 


- 


- 


: I 


Tuberculosis other than pul- 
monary. 


Beverly, 

Boston, 

Brockton, . 

Cambridge, 

Chelsea, 

Haverhill, . 

Holyoke, 

Lawrence, . 

Medford, 

Melrose, 

New Bedford, 

Somerville, 

Springfield, 

Taunton, 

Waltham, . 

Weymouth, 

Woburn , 


4 
2 
1 

1 
1 

1 

2 

1 


4 

2 
1 

1 
1 

2 

1 
1 


1 
5 

1 
1 

1 

1 
1 

1 
1 


1 

1 
1 

1 

1 
1 
3 


1 


Meningitis other than cerebro- Watertown, 
spinal. 


1 - 


1 


- 


- 


- 



213 





Place. 


Wkkk P.NI.I.'.G — 


DISEASE. 


Oct. 2. 


Oct. 9. 


Oct. 16. 


Oct. 23. 


Oct. 30. 


Influenza 


Boston, 


- 


- 


1 


- 


2 


Tetanus, 


New Bedford, 


- 


- 


- 




1 


Smallpox, .... 


Boston, 


- 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Anterior poliomyelitis, 


Medford, 
Quincy, 
New Bedford, 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 



WEEKLY RETURNS OP CASES OP INFECTIOUS DISEASES. 



Cases of Infectious Diseases reported during the Weeks of 
Oct. 2, 9, 16, 23 and 30, 1909. 

[Under the provisions of section 52 of chapter 75 of the Revised Laws.] 



Week ending — 



Oct. 2. 



Diphtheria, 

Measles, 

Scarlet fever, 

Typhoid fever, 

Tuberculosis, pulmonary, 
Cerebro-spinal meningitis, 
Whooping cough, .... 

Varicella, 

Erysipelas, 

Mumps, ...... 

Ophthalmia neonatorum, . 
Tuberculosis other than pulmonary, . 

Smallpox, 

Tetanus, ...... 

Meningitis other than cerebro-spinal, 

Trichinosis, 

Anthrax, ...... 

Malaria, 

Actinomycosis, 

Trachoma, 



126 

23 

107 

117 

125 

1 

1 

10 



166 

72 

116 

156 

124 

3 

24 

7 



181 
71 
116 
146 
136 

24 
17 



206 
112 
152 
111 
146 

22 
4 



217 
98 

140 
92 

129 

43 

42 

1 

2 
2 



214 



MONTHLY REPORT ON INSPECTION OF FOOD AND DRUGS. 



The following summary presents the results of the examination of food 
and drugs made by the State Board of Health during the month of 
October, 1909: — 





















Number 


adulterated 






Numher 


adulterated 




Articles exajiined. 


found 
to be of 


or varying 


Total. 


Articles examined. 


to be of 


or varying 


Total. 




Good 
Quality. 


Legal 
Standard. 






Good 
Quality. 


Legal 
Standard. 




Butter, . 


13 




13 


Lard, . 


2 




2 


Cheese, . 


4 


- 


4 


Malt liquors, 








Cider, . 


4 


- 


4 


beer, . 


1 


- 


1 


Cocoa, . 


1 


- 


1 


Meats, . 


8 


- 


8 


Confectionery, 


4 


- 


4 


Milk, . 


299 


56 


355 


Cream, . 


5 


- 


5 


N on-alcoholic 








Cream of tartar, . 


2 


- 


2 


drinks, 


1 


- 


1 


Drugs, . 


66 


27 


93 


Olive oil, 


10 


2 


12 


Flavoring ex- 








Pickles, 


4 


- 


4 


tracts, 


5 


1 


6 


Proprietary foods, 


- 


4 


4 


Grape juice, . 


1 


1 


2 


Spices, . 


7 


- 


7 


Honey, . 


5 


- 


5 


Table sauce, 


2 


1 


3 


Jams, iellies and 






















preserves, . 


10 


1 


11 


Total, . 


454 


93 


547 



The samples of drugs found to be adulterated were : camphor liniment, 
spirit of anise, spirit of camphor, spirit of peppermint, tincture of iodine, 
ointment of zinc oxide, and a proprietary preparation. 

The cities and towns in which samples were collected were : Adams, 
Andover, Attleborough, Barnstable, Berkley, Brockton, Brookline, Cam- 
bridge, Chelmsford, Chelsea, Concord, Dalton, Danvers, Fall River, 
Fitchburg, Hyde Park, Lanesborough, Lawrence, Leominster, Lee, Lowell, 
Lynn, Mansfield, Marlborough, Natick, Newburyport, North Adams, 
Pittsfield, Quincy, Eaynham, Salem, Somerville, Spencer, Taunton, 
Watertown, Weymouth, Wilmington and Woburn. 



PROSECUTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW RELATING 
TO FOOD AND DRU'. 



Thirty-one convictions were secured during the month oi I ■ 
for selling adulterated food and drugs, as follows: — 



Niniic Di Defendant 



Char. 



Mariano A rude, . 
Stephen Benea, 
George E. Blake, . 
.limit's Broen, 
William E. BriggS, 

Bartholomew ■' , 1 larrol 

Martin E. Bgan, . 
Robort Evans, 
Chas. W. Harris, . 
Jolm A. .1 olmson, 
Jacob F. Kircbner, 
Joseph Levitt, 
Frank Loohr, 
Harry Mcdlyn, 
William McNil'f, . 
William McNilT, . 
James McCormick, 
James McCormick, 
William S. Noble, 
('has. ('. Nuiill, 
Ernest A. Peck, . 
Ernest A. Peck, . 
Almon E. Richardson, 
Anthony C. Richardson 
Frank J. Rooney, . 
Frank J. Rooney, . 
Geo. H. Swift, 
Henry M. Wade, . 
Edward H. Howard, 
Edward H. Howard, 

Fred. W. Putney, . 



i Watered. 

Fines imposed, $618.75. 



Baynham, 

Lynn, 

Lenox, . 

Concord, 
Taunton, 
Nat irk, . 
Pittstield, 
Woods Hole, 
Leomin 
North Adams 
Dalton, . 
Lynn, 

Richmond, 

Marlborough, 

Marlborough , 

Chelmsford, 

Chelmsford, 

Pittstield, 

Lynn. 

Brockton, 

Brockton, 

Winchester, 

Winchester, 

Marlborough, 

Marlborough, 

Berkley, . 
Stookbridge, 

Taunton, 
Taunton, 

Boston, . 



- Skimmed. 



Milk (total 

Milk (total solids, n I 
Milk (l 
Milk (total 

Milk (total solids, 11 . 
Milk (total 
Milk (total 
Milk ( 

Milk (total solid 
Milk (total solid 
Milk (total solids, IS 
Milk (total solids, 10 - 
Milk (total soli. 
Milk 

Milk (total sol; 
Milk (total 
Milk total solid 
Milk (totil solids, 10.91).' 
Milk. 1 

Milk (total solids, 11 - 
Milk (tot i\ 
Milk (total s.did- 
Milk (: ' 

Milk (t. . 10.90). 

Milk (total 
Milk (total - 

Milk (total solids, 11 60). 
Milk (total 
Spirit of anise *8 I 
Spirit of peppermint 

0.8 P. 
Spirit of camphor 
- P. 



sled. 



216 





















































































<D 


CD 


CD 


CD CD CD 


CD 


o 




- 




-- 




-_ 


CD 












CD 


O 


CD 


O CD O 


CD 


CD 




CD 




CD 




CD 


CD 












u 


h 


IH 


t! • >h ►" 


(4 


(4 




u 




U 




(4 


hi 












CD 


CD 


CD 


S CD ® 


CD 


1/ 




-_ 




- 




CD 


CD 












Ph 


a< 


Ph 


Ph g, Oh 


P< 


Oh 




— 




— 




— 


Ph 












O 


c 


O 


S o o 


o 


o 




O 




c 




o 


O 












CO 


o 


i—l 


N . Ol Ol 


co 


CO 




CO 




tt 




-1 


i~. 












01 


CO 


CO 


00 CO CO 


CO 


CO 




CO 




CO 




CO 


•<ji 


« 










C3 


ci 


09 


ill 




4J" 

C9 




09 




— » 




g 


OS 


>f 










.« 


.- 


... 


*^* 


■•■ 


.„ 




.M 




■- 




.- 


•" 


~e 


rS'S 


pj 


t5 


>o 


^ 


4^ 


^ 


rt -** *" 


■U 


^ 




*i 




-^ 




»; 


*f 


< 


'3*3 


'3 


'3 


'3 


BJJ 


CD 


3 


W § JJ 


3 


iT 




I 




3 




3 


3 


c 


ci oS 


OS 


03 




CD 


M ° 


C CD 


M e ^ 


CD 


h 


CD 


(4 


CD 


^ 


CD 


u°»J 


"5 
3 


'o'o 

S N 

- - 

<D 05 


'o 

N 

CD 


O 

c 

N 


_o o . 

so? 


CD 

O 


CD b 
2 CD 

la 


CD ui 
•" CD 

T3 05 


2 fc CD tn © U 

c3 £ ^ c -^ s 

T3 OS'S OSH3 o 


CD u CD 


— 

o 


e9 


|4 

o 


CC 

cfl 


(4 

■- 
e<s 




t4 

CD 

— 


CD u O 
£ & 

r- ? — 




h2 -O 


rO 


r=> 


0! C)« 




CD . 


03 r-; 


CD . CD ■ o • 


CD . CD 




I 




CD 




CS 




3 • 3 










-rs o 


d 




■3 2 


aoao^H 












N 






_ -1 _ 




"h3 w 


•^3 


~ 


^. » o 


^^ 




•a 


-^t-i^H^H 


-3 i-i 13 


^ 


~ 


'" , 


~ 


i-i 


— 


r^i 


HO " ~ 
































39 








t3T3 


f» 


t 


" U P 


5 


^■3 

cs.r; 


■Ong 
CD — 


_ M " CO "J CO 

~ t- ~ -a "o 'a 

CD — CD •- CD .X 


cd .a £ 


-y. 


CD 


tn 


CD 


2 


-I 


m 


; CO 
CD 2 CD 




































9} CD 


CD 


CD 


CD _ O 

3 *!-, 




X o 


- o 


X o.S O.S o 


X c .X 


O 








o 






=, O .X 




hi U 


> 

(4 




CO 


cS cc 


ci " 


oS co cS w o3 ^ 


j* CO cS 


cc 


HJ 


aa 


« 


BE 


- 


CO 


s9 * — 




<o CD 


CD 


CD 






§1 


Hrfj c^ a*3 






















co co 


CO 


CO 


£*>£ 


03 


o £ 


3 5 5 


^ 







H 


^ 





4J 


3 5 3 




C u 


IH 


u 


**~~*n 


O 


w o 


CD o 


CD o ° O CD O 


CD o ° 


3 


a 


O 


CD 


3 


CD 


c 


o © w 




&<Ph 


Ph 


Ph 


Ph co i-i 


H 


H 


tH 


H H H 


H 


H 




H 




H 




EH 


H 


V 






i 


,d 


























• 


•a 








o 


r 


























o 
u 








S ' " 


00 
CO 

S3 
























CO 
CO 


o 


_f • 






03 


s 


• 






00 
CO 
















CS 




m r 






P-l 


ja 








C3 


















S3 


CO 


M 




& • • 

03 


C 


. 






a 
















J3 
Ed 

P 


.C 


jpi 


o 

be 




^ m S3 


a 


CO 
CO 

e3 






■d 

14 

o 
















O 

(H 

o 


C 


^ 5 






3 55 


1 


s 






CO 

a 
















CO 
CD 


3 


^1 


IS 






a" 






















a 


5 


o 

ci 

a 
i— i 




^"3 "3 

&© 2 


a 

03 

— 

B 
o 


o 

3 

e3 

H 






2 

5 
















03 

i-3 

H 

o 

+4 


o 


^-^ 


6 
o 

(4 

CD 

3 
cS 

M 




r2 ®" fe 


O 


CO* 






a 



















o 


" CD 




Ou« 


CO 


6J3 






















o 




°&H 

a - 

.a 

-O — • 


i 


8£J 

2 ° 

o . - 

4-> CO CO 

-J Cj CS 


o 
fa 

CO 
CD 

s 


be 
PQ 

a 






3 
o 

CD 

00 

CD 

a 
















P3 

d 

£ 

-3 






<i 




o3 


^ 






03 

Ha 
















«l 




• o 


^ 


o 


• - i 


























. 






o 


— 


a x 




























■22 
ft 

E 


os 

.a 

o 

H 


a) 
g 


o 

GO 

OS 


-3 W 

CD 


• 


• 






















• 


OS 

ED 


.•TS 


CD . 


i-i 

OS 


.2 03 


. 


, 






. 
















B 


o 


© rt 


32^ 


O CD w 




























o 
u 

a) 


2 c- 
3B.2 


S 

C o 


CD 


o4 rt =l © 

2 ^coPh 

Ui *— ' CO CO 

Sieac, 




• 






• 
















• 


€ 


~ > CD 

S 3^ 


CD O 




M 


M 






M 
















X 




OS5 


fc 


Ph 


«>-B-< 


§ 


s 






s 
















s 


Number 

of 
Sample. 


00 00 


■a 


(35 


to 

6s o o 


04 

Ss 




_ 


O -H CM 
CM OJ CN 


CO ij< 
CI CN 


CN 


CO 
OS 


CM 


Ph 


CD 


to 


k^ CC i-i 


k- 


t- 


CO 


co co cp 

ceo 


co cc 


CO 


co 


c 




~" 


© o 


C 


: 


o o t- 


o 


CO 


o 


c S 


o 


o 


O 


CO 



21 



aaas = aa = = = = = = = :: = 

o o o o o 6 '-/ '-/ '^ C -j © 

Sj £ S £ S g , .. i 

c> co « co W ci eg «^ pg gq DC eg 



22o 



w i- w u aj 

< fc£ ^ if ^ is 

-O CD "3 21 73 
<P • <D . gj 



I B d 
o »j 6 u, 9 <- 

•'? 4 D OS 3 ~ 
ft fc P«fr ~> 

^ -a 2 "= £ "= 



S a a 



B ~ 

5.S 



cS 

-— I 



•- I- -- 

u S - 

i - i 



8 u 

fa - 



= r: r -: ~ " 
_ • **^ 5 , 8 ■ ^ ■ > "" » . '- " : - *~ # 



D .2 <E .2 <B 12 4> 

= 0-O.So-' 



m _- tf] ^ co _ x ■/. BE 

.2 « .2 » .i «/ .i - .- B .- - . 



"o .- o .z g .5 c .- "o .- g ■= S« z .5 o .= 

■ d 1 - - / - 



o « O « o « o 
H H H H 


o 5 

« o 

H 


cont 
Total 

cont 
Total 


P ~ 
O 5 
O o 

H 


§2 

O o 

H 


5 $ 

O o 

H 


§5 

e o 
H 


cont 
Total 

cont 
Total 


o 9 

« o 


cont) 
Total 

cont: 
Total 


5 

e 


^ 























CO CO oc cc 



218 



INSPECTION OP DAIRIES. 



During the month of October, 1909, 183 dairies in New Hampshire 
and Vermont, supplying milk for public sale in Massachusetts, were 
examined, as follows : — 



New Hampshire Dairies. 



Number 
examined. 



Number found 

to present 

no Objectionable 

Features. 



Number to 

which Letters 

were sent. 



Antrim, . 

Second inspection, 
Bennington, . 

Second inspection, 
Chester, . 

Second inspection, 
Deering, . 

Second inspection, 
Deny, 

Second inspection, 
Francestown, 

Second inspection, 
Greenfield, 

Second inspection, 
Hancock, 

Second inspection, 
Hillsborough, 

Second inspection, 
Hudson, . 

Second inspection, 
Jaffrey, . 

Second inspection, 
Londonderry, . 

Second inspection, 
Pelham, . 

Second inspection, 
Peterborough , 

Second inspection, 
Windham, 

Second inspection, 



2 
12 

2 

1 

1 

9 

1 

2 
28 

18 
7 
6 
6 

12 
1 

12 
4 



9 
6 
5 
3 
6 
1 
10 
2 



50.00 
33.33 



100.00 



55.56 

50.00 
28.57 

50.00 

85.71 

83.33 

50.00 

50.00 

100.00 

83.33 

50.00 



1 
1 

4 

1 

1 
20 

9 

1 

1 
3 



50.00 
66.fi7 



100.00 

100.00 

44.44 

100.00 
50.00 
71.43 

50.00 

14.29 

16.67 

50.00 

50.00 

16.67 

50.00 



Total number of New Hampshire dairies examined, 124 

Number found to be free from objectionable conditions, 63 

Number to which letters were sent, 61 

Total number of conditions to which attention was called, 149 

Percentage of dairies which passed inspection, 50.81 



219 



Vermont Dairies. 



Place. 


Number 
examined 


Number found 

to present 

no Objeciionable 

Features. 


Per< ent 


Number to 

which Letter* 
were sent. 


Per Cent. 


Barnet, . 

Second inspection, 
Barton, . 

Second inspection, 
Burke, . 

Second inspection, 
Coventry, 

Second inspection, 
Lyndon, . 

Second inspection, 
Lyndonville, . 

Second inspection, 
Putney, . 

Second inspection, 
St. Johnsbury, 

Second inspection, 
Sutton, . 

Second inspection, 
Westminster, 

Second inspection, 




3 
3 

4 

6 

6 

3 

14 

2 

8 
5 
5 


2 
2 
2 
3 

2 

2 

10 

1 

1 

2 
2 


66 67 

66.67 

50.00 

50 00 

33.33 

66.67 

71.43 

50.00 

12.50 
40.00 
40.00 


1 

1 

_ 

2 
3 

4 
1 

4 

1 

7 
3 
3 


33.33 

33.33 

_ 

50.00 

50.00 

66.67 

33.33 

28.57 

50.00 

87.50 
60.00 
60.00 



Total number of Vermont dairies examined, 59 

Number found to be free from objectionable conditions, 29 

Number to which letters were sent, 30 

Total number of conditions to which attention was called, 81 

Percentage of dairies which passed inspection, 49.15 



ANTERIOR POLIOMYELITIS. 



At a meeting of the State Board of Health, held on Nov. 4, 1909, it 
was voted that anterior poliomyelitis (infantile paralysis) be declared 
a disease dangerous to the public health, and therefore notifiable under 
sections 49 and 50 of chapter 75 of the Eevised Laws. 



JOYCE'S BRAND SUPERIOR MALT. 



Proprietary preparation advertised as unsalable in October, 1909, 
Joyce's Brand Superior Malt, Chas. H. Joyce, 31 Central Street, and 5 
to 15 Middle Street, Lowell, Mass. No statement of the percentage of 
alcohol. 



__ 



WHAT IS DISEASED MEAT, AND WHAT IS ITS RELATION 
TO MEAT INSPECTION- 



BV Pi THEOBAIJD BJOTH, Boston. 



There has been recently discovered, more or less accidentally, a law 
among the statutes of this Commonwealth which has been interpreted 
as prohibiting the sale of meat from animals affected with local disease 
of however slight a character. This law is in conflict with the long- 
standing, well-tried and reasonable regulations of the United States 
concerning meat destined for interstate traffic. Under these circum- 
I have been asked to introduce here a discussion on the text of 
disease and its relation to the inspection of meat. 'While turning the 
subject over in my mind I came to the conclusion that a general state- 
ment of the principles which should control the meat traffic would per- 
haps serve our purpose better than a discussion of a few kinds of affec- 
tions which are specially hit by our present law. These can be taken 
up in the subsequent discussion by others. 

The subject is in its larger bearings essentially a question of waste 
versus economy. The discovert' of waste and its utilization marks many 
epochs in our material progress. We are everywhere beginning to see 
waste towards which we have been blind hitherto. To discover it means 
to utilize it. The enlightenment of any nation or community may be 
measured by its adjustment of means and ends to one another. If there 
is much waste in attaining a certain end, intelligence is low, for human 
ends defeat themselves through loss of energy and resources. 

3 nee furnishes us the insight needed to accurately adjust means 
and ends to each other. If science is worth anything to civilization, it 
is in creating new values, making new classifications, transforming 
crude into more refined distinctions, and leading us from emotional to 
rational states of mind which enable us to reconstruct the material 
world for better uses. Our present civilization is largely constructed 
out of what our savage forbears thought worthless, and in each suc- 
-tep man has taken up something ignored or rejected by his 
predecessors. Without this process of readaptation and re-discovery 
advance would be impossible. 

While science is building up, there is going on a continual tearing 
down, and our onward movement is measured neither by one nor by the 

1 Reprinted from the American Journal of Public Hygiene for May, 1909. Read at a quarterly 
meeting of the Massachusetts A esociation of Boards of Health, held April 1'J, 1900. 



221 

other process, but by the difference between the two. It is often difficult 
to decide which process is more active. It is becoming evident on all 
sides that through unmeasured waste of resources we have been exhaust- 
ing our material capital, whereas we should be living only on our income. 
A sense of obligation to our posterity, which also is a measure of enlight- 
enment, should induce us to come down to our income as soon as 
possible. 

Unfortunately, the method of equalizing losses through insurance of 
various kinds, pensions and taxes, shuts our eyes to the fact that every 
time property of any kind is destroyed by fire or otherwise it is absolutely 
lost. The community and the nation are by so much poorer. TVe have 
irrecoverably lost so much capital. 

Among our material resources our food supply represents both capital 
and income. It stands for capital in so far as we are withdrawing the 
nutritive elements from the soil in the food we raise, without always 
restoring them to the soil in some other form. 

Flesh foods are among the most expensive of our food products. They 
represent the concentrated energy of vegetable foods made over by the 
animal body. During this transformation there is much loss of energy, 
some of which in the best kind of agriculture is promptly returned to the 
soil as fertilizer to maintain soil fertility. The modern world is addicted 
to the use of flesh foods. The great uninhabited territories of the west- 
ern hemisphere have furnished for many years a rich supply to the entire 
world. This source is slowly drying up as agriculture takes up the land, 
and gradually the raising of food-producing animals will have to become 
diffused and form an integral part of agriculture everjnvhere. In other 
words, we shall have to look for a developing, local, domestic supply, as 
is the case in European countries. 

The influence of such a change — from the great herds and flocks of 
the far west to the small numbers on the small farms everywhere — on 
the incidence of animal diseases will be marked. The great collections 
of animals on the prairies and uplands have been relatively free from 
disease. Few, if any, animals have been introduced there. The move- 
ment has been chiefly outward. Hence the chance for the introduction 
of disease has been slight. Parasitic diseases have been common in 
places, but the great plagues, unless indigenous and perpetuated in the 
soil, have been absent. 

The domestic animals on the ordinary farm are in a somewhat different 
situation. There is more intercourse among the farmers and more move- 
ment among the animals themselves. This is especially true among 
dairy herds. Farmers while attempting to improve their stock often 
introduce infectious diseases. The countrv fairs and shows contribute 



222 

much to the dissemination of animal plagues. The farm animals are 
furthermore subject to various accidents and to minor ailments, because 
they are overfed, overbred and underexposed to the healthful influences 
of air and sunlight. They are not so treated that the vitality of the 
species is likely to remain on a level. It will surely decline, and even if 
Ave finally succeed in suppressing one plague, such as tuberculosis, an- 
other will in due time take its place, to thrive on the unnatural condi- 
tions, unless we replace them by such as are more normal, physiological. 

In view of the many possibilities of disease, both infectious and non- 
infectious, which the future has in store for our food-producing animals, 
we must therefore strive to maintain as far as possible the physical 
integrity of our domestic animals both by preventing infection and by 
raising their natural resistance to disease. In the meantime, we must 
determine as far as possible through scientific means what pathological 
states of animals are dangerous to human health when the flesh is used 
as food. This is a complicated problem, for there are inextricably inter- 
woven in it sanitary, esthetic and financial considerations, more or less 
in conflict with one another. 

Taking first the sanitary aspect as the most important, let us endeavor 
to define under what conditions animals yield diseased meat. Here we 
must distinguish at the outset between diseases which are infectious, 
i.e., due to bacteria or animal parasites, and those which are not. Among 
the infectious diseases we must make a further distinction between those 
which are and which are not transmissible to man. Constitutional dis- 
eases not referable to infectious or parasitic agents are relatively un- 
common, for our food-producing animals are as a rule killed at an early 
stage in life, before decrepitude or the diseases of declining life, so 
common among human beings, have a chance to show themselves. I 
shall therefore refer to such diseases only casually. We are really con- 
cerned with infectious and parasitic diseases, for infections usually seize 
upon diseased states. They move in when health moves out, and they 
usually terminate life by grafting themselves on pathological conditions. 

An examination of the field of animal pathology shows that we actually 
have few ideally healthy animals. It is hardly to be expected that we 
should have. The abnormalities encountered are of many kinds, ranging 
from the mere carriers of germs to various stages of local and general 
diseases. Thus we find in the mucus from the throats of animals bacteria 
which kill rabbits and guinea pigs inoculated with this mucus. If we 
should inject a syringeful of blood from a healthy cow in the southern 
States into a cow living in our own State, we should produce an infectious 
disease probably fatal. In the intestines of animals are found bacilli 
of tetanus and botulism and malignant oedema. In the winter, infectious 



223 

skin diseases may be seen on cattle otherwise in good condition. In 
certain regions actinomycosis of the jaw and tongue, or even of the udder, 
is not uncommon. Most cows after they have reached a certain age will 
show signs of recent or old tuberculosis. 

Again, animals not infrequently suffer from injuries which open the 
way for bacteria. Cows are apt to swallow pieces of baled-hay wire, hair 
pins, safety pins, nails, etc. In some cases these pierce the walls of one 
of the stomachs, and produce foul-smelling abscesses in the immediate 
neighborhood of this organ. Sometimes the infection extends to the 
liver. I have seen pieces of baled hay wire in various stages of migration 
from stomach to heart. Some years ago there were reported cases of 
cancer of the nictitating membrane of the eyes of cattle, due probably 
to injury of some kind. Bemains of pneumonia and pleurisy, peritonitis, 
former fractures of ribs and limbs are not uncommon. Animal parasites 
are usually present in the walls of the stomach and intestines and else- 
where. There is probably not a cow in existence which does not have 
sarcosporidia in its muscles, filaria in abdomen or blood. The variety of 
such parasites increases as we approach warmer climates. 

If, therefore, we should reinforce the naked-eye examination with the 
microscope, we should find still fewer ideally perfect creatures. None 
of the conditions I have mentioned would be considered harmful or 
objectionable, with a sane rational meat inspection service in operation. 

Among the infectious and parasitic diseases which are transmissible 
to man we may mention anthrax, glanders, rabies, foot-and-mouth 
disease, tuberculosis, septicaemia and pyaemia, paratyphoid infections and 
trichinosis. The flesh of animals affected with these diseases is not 
known to be dangerous to man after thorough cooking, if we except those 
affections due to the group of paratyphoid or paracolon bacilli. This 
statement has a broad historical basis, for in centuries past flesh from 
animals thus affected was frequently or even regularly consumed. Each 
disease has to be considered by itself, if we wish to single out and define 
the danger to man. The real danger in such diseases as anthrax, rabies 
and glanders lurks in the handling of the carcass and the uncooked meat 
by unsuspecting purchasers, and in the further dissemination of the 
specific infection. Hence all traffic in any or all portions of carcasses 
affected with these diseases is prohibited, and the slaughter of animal? 
in which such diseases are recognized during life is forbidden, for obvious 
reasons. Trichinous pork is harmless to manipulation, but highly dan- 
gerous as an uncooked food. Certain infectious diseases of animals not 
transmissible to man may be highly contagious to live stock in general. 
and traffic in infected meat is forbidden on this account. 

Perhaps the tAvo animal affections which have caused the greatest harm 



224 

to man through the food are trichinosis and various septic diseases of 
cattle associated with typhoid-like bacteria. Trichinosis is eliminated by 
boiling the meat, but boiling has not in all cases destroyed the dangers 
arising from the second group of infections. 

Passing from these acute, generalized infectious diseases to the localized 
chronic types, we reach a borderland between the so-called normal, healthy 
or sound, and diseased meat. 

For example, actinomycosis may remain localized in some part or 
organ situated more or less superficially, and the animal persist in a 
normal state of nutrition. The local affection may nowise disturb the 
physiological activities. In tuberculosis the earliest lesions are situated 
in lymphnodes associated with lungs or mesentery or throat, or all com- 
bined; but the condition of the animal may be excellent. Where a ra- 
tional meat inspection service exists, such animals are considered sound, 
and for good and sufficient reasons. Only where such localized diseases 
have overstepped certain well-defined bounds may we entertain a suspicion 
that perhaps the meat might not be absolutely free from the bacteria 
of the disease. 

Of all the primarily local affections which may attack our cattle, 
tuberculosis seems at present singled out for the sharpest attack. Yet, 
of all the localized diseases, there is none which is less objectionable to 
me than cases of primary tuberculosis of slight or moderate degree as 
sources of beef. The more localized a disease and the slower its progress, 
the better protected are the other organs through a slow development of 
immunity. The animal body is a large and complex community, and 
disturbance in one place does not mean a general panic. Diseased con- 
ditions may thus be represented by gradations from the slightest local 
to the severest general disorders; from the most harmless to the most 
dangerous types of generalized disease. In any case the danger is greatly 
reduced, if not destroyed, by cooking. The danger in handling the un- 
cooked article also varies according to the bacteria or parasites involved. 
With such a complicated situation before us, it is obvious that it cannot 
be simplified by resorting to a town meeting vote, but must be treated 
scientifically. 

Turning now to aesthetic considerations, we may maintain that it is 
disagreeable to think of eating the flesh of any animal which had the 
slightest blemish anywhere. Perhaps it is, but under the domination 
of this feeling we are better off to cast our lot with vegetarians. It is 
often easier to school our common sense and reason in such matters than 
our instinctive feelings; they usually win the victory. Such feelings, 
however, are possessed in widely different degrees by different national- 
ities. For example, horse flesh is used extensively on the continent of 
Europe. In Saxony, dogs are slaughtered for food. 



225 

Peculiar and contradictory conditions prevail in different countries, 
partly as a result of certain ingrained customs and habits. Pork is not 
inspected for trichinae in this country, because it has at no time appeared 
very necessary to do so to protect public health against these para- 
Yet now and then cases occur, and autopsies and dissections have shown 
that up to 5 per cent, of human beings in our country have been infected 
at one time or another. On the other hand, Germany has established 
an extensive inspection service to detect trichinous pork, since more pork 
is consumed there than beef. The reason for this extensive service, 
which included in 1904 28,000 employees, is found in the fact that pork 
is frequently consumed uncooked. Severe and highly fatal epidemics 
have occurred, which made this protective machinery necessary. 

Contradictory customs and habits prevail among civilized nations 
with reference to bacteria themselves. I stated above that probably very 
few bona fide disease germs are dangerous when eaten in cooked foods. 
Yet there is a tendency to go to extremes, to avoid the possibility that 
any infection may be contained in the flesh, even though such infection 
unheated may be absolutely harmless to human beings. On the other 
hand, we take up to one-half million bacteria per cubic centimeter or 
fifteen million per ounce in milk. Here we find microbes of all kinds 
and sizes, and of various shades of pathogenic and toxic power. We eat 
large numbers of bacteria in raw oysters during April, September and 
October of the open season. We seed our milk with lactic acid bacilli, 
and incubate it so that billions may develop in it for curative purposes. 
Finally, we ourselves are no strangers to bacteria. They occur on all 
mucous membranes, and they make up about one-third the weight of the 
dried contents of the large intestine. They have even become beneficial, 
under certain conditions. The subcutaneous injection of dead bacilli 
of various diseases promises to become an important means of not only 
increasing our resistance to disease, but even of curing us of persistent, 
longstanding bacterial affections. Some years ago Yon Behring hoped 
to obtain from cows highly immunized against tuberculosis, by the in- 
jection of the products of tubercle bacilli, milk which through its pro- 
tective antitoxins might become a valuable curative agent. The hope 
has not yet been realized. 

These illustrations will suffice to show that our objection to meat 
coming from animals not perfectly sound or healthy, leaving aside those 
diseases transmissible to man, is largely based on aesthetic rather than on 
sanitary considerations, and that our daily actions are hopelessly con- 
tradictory. 

As a result of this state of affairs, we find the inspection of meats gov- 
erned by different regulations in different countries. Thus, the meat 
inspection laws of Germany are far less exclusive, but at the same time 



226 

more highly developed and worked out in minuter detail than in any 
other country. Diseased meat is there defined solely in accordance with 
its potential danger to the health of human beings and to other still 
healthy domestic animals. Meat is classed as utilizable, non-utilizable 
and of inferior grade. A fourth class is created, which is utilizable only 
under certain restrictions. These are, that it be sold after sterilization, 
at a lower price, and only in small quantities to any one purchaser. A 
certain percentage of animals which the United States inspector now con- 
demns is utilizable in Germany. A larger percentage which he condemns 
is utilizable there under the restrictions mentioned. It having been 
learned that the flesh of animals affected with various types of pneu- 
monia is harmless and not reduced in nutritive value, such flesh is 
classed as utilizable. About 1 per cent, of all animals are slaughtered 
because affected with diseases which induce the owners to dispose of 
them. If after inspection no reason exists for imputing any harmful 
qualities to the flesh, it is sold either with or without restrictions, accord- 
ing to the nature of the case. I might give other examples of the opera- 
tions of the German law, but they will suffice to show that the grading 
of meat is based on harmlessness and nutritive value, and that it is 
determined by rigidly scientific means. Moreover, medical history has 
demonstrated, through great self-imposed experiments of the human race 
in earlier times, that flesh from most diseases is harmless if eaten after 
thorough cooking. 

Coming now to our own situation, the question arises, "Where shall we 
draw the line? Who shall define it? What rulings will redound to the 
advantage of the masses of the people? These questions are difficult to 
answer. They involve individual and racial prejudices and grave 
financial problems. Any answer whatever presupposes in the first place 
thorough inspection of all meats destined for human consumption by 
trained inspection. 

A set of complicated meat inspection regulations can be handled only 
by scientifically trained inspectors. The regulations are based upon what 
we know of the usual course of the disease, the behavior of disease germs 
within and without the body of the affected animal, their capacity for 
producing toxins, the nature of these toxins, and the natural immunity 
of the various tissues of the animal. No one but a well-trained veter- 
inary graduate can be trusted to interpret such regulations. It may be 
stated truthfully that most intelligent, experienced butchers can distin- 
guish normal meat from low-grade abnormal meat. They can tell 
whether an animal has diseased parts or organs, but there their useful- 
ness ends. They cannot be expected to recognize localized tuberculosis, 
for example, and differentiate it from the generalized or advanced 



227 

stages. Their judgment would be of little value in distinguishing 
local suppurative from general septic conditions. The trained inspector's 
function is to save meat wherever that can be done, rather than to 
reject it. The process of rejection is easy enough. It does not reqn 
technical training. It would not take long for one skilled in judging 
form, consistency and color to detect the ideally healthy animal. But 
there would be little meat handled and sold after his inspection, if every 
minor blemish were counted against the animal. This is not what we 
can afford. 

With the aid of trained inspectors it would be possible to satisfy 
various groups of people by classifying meat as is now done in Germany. 
The healthfulness of the article sold should be guaranteed by municipal, 
State or national inspection, and the quality defined in accordance with 
other standards. It can then be left to the buyer to decide whether he 
wishes beef from ideally sound animals according to our present Mas- 
sachusetts law at $1 to $1.50 a pound, or the article as passed by United 
States inspectors at 30 cents, perhaps. He should also be permitted 
under certain restrictions to buy beef from animals certain organs or 
parts of which have been rejected as diseased, at say 12 cents a pound. 
He should even have the opportunity to buy sterilized meat at 7 cents. 
if he wishes it. Though we may be still some distance from the point 
where meat will be so classified and sold, yet I think we are moving 
toward it. With the growth of the domestic live stock industry we shall 
be forced to follow the older countries, who have had to work this problem 
out for themselves. Without educated inspectors this cannot be done 
safely. 1 

A rational meat inspection service is the best which veterinary medicine 
can give to practical life. Some of the most conspicuous German veterin- 
ary scientists started as meat inspectors. It gives material for a life-long 
study of diseased conditions. The inspector, like the physician, must 
always be prepared to meet hitherto unknown pathological combinations. 

] *That our national regulations are not perfect is shown by the following exemption of farmers 
products: — "Section 14. When any cattle, sheep, swine or goats have been slaughtered by any 
farmer on the farm, and the carcasses, parts of carcasses, or meat products thereof are offered to 
any common carrier for transportation from one State or Territory or the District of Columbia 
to another State or Territory or the District of Columbia, the common carrier may so transport 
such carcasses, parts of carcasses, or meat food products as long as the same may be identified as 
of animals slaughtered by any farmer on the farm." 

The shipper is l'equired to certify that such meat products are "sound, healthful, wholesome 
and fit for human food," etc. How "any farmer on the farm " is always able to tell us that his 
animals were sound, wholesome and fit for human food is somewhat beyond my comprehension. 
This section must be classed among those clauses which occasionally find their way into our laws 
and which seem to suspend the operation of the entire law in which they appear. This is evi- 
dently a sop to "the farmer on the farm." If such products were to be consumed by the farmer 
himself or in his household, it might perhaps be unreasonable to compel him to submit his prod- 
ucts to inspection. 



228 

One who inspects animals reared in New England has much to learn if 
he should be transferred to the south or to the west. Each territory has 
its own disease problems, in addition to the common, universal ones. 

In the final shaping of our meat inspection the economic or financial 
aspect of the whole problem will be of no small importance. It is 
obvious that the strictness with which animals locally or slightly dis- 
eased are eliminated from the meat supply will eventually be governed 
by the law of supply and demand. When we are very hungry, we are 
much less squeamish about onr food than when our tissues are con- 
tinuously supersaturated with the daintiest that can be supplied. If 
our meat supply becomes a diminishing quantity our laws will sooner 
or later relax, and we shall come down more and more to the question of 
healthfulness, irrespective of other considerations. 

A rational meat inspection law will also aid the farmer in improving 
his stock and weeding out unsatisfactory animals. If we should exclude 
entirely from the market beef from cattle affected with primary tuber- 
culosis of the lymph nodes or other organs in early or arrested stages, 
it would prove a serious obstacle to any further purification of our dairy 
herds from this disease. If the owner finds that all animals reacting to 
tuberculin are to be condemned as unfit for food, he will think twice 
before undertaking the complete elimination of tuberculosis. While we 
may be taking tubercle bacilli in raw milk, we are vigorously opposed to 
the barest suspicion of having to take a stray dead bacillus in cooked 
beef. With a proper inspection the chance of any infection of the meat 
in the cases mentioned is extremely small, and the chance of any human 
infection from this meat infinitely smaller. 

In the final adjustment we shall also learn that with a growing do- 
mestic supply of animals destined for food, public abattoirs will be 
necessary to properly carry out the regulations pertaining to the safe- 
guarding of flesh foods. Small communities will have to band together 
and build sanitary slaughter-houses, and forbid the use of small, private, 
usually filthy, killing places. Only in large municipal plants can wall- 
trained, well-paid inspectors be fully utilized. The cost of properly 
inspecting numerous small establishments would be prohibitory, and such 
inspection would have to be consigned to untrained, incompetent hands, 
with the result that the safeguarding and proper valuation of the product 
would be highly unsatisfactory under any law. It will be claimed that 
any attempt at classifying meat products will fail, because lower-grade 
meats, like oleomargarine, for example, may become the means of de- 
ception, misrepresentation and fraud. It will also be claimed that the 
people will refuse to buy lower-grade meats. The first objection can. 
I think, be met by carefully limited sales. The second claim will prob- 
ably prove to be unfounded if the healthfulness of the meat is 



229 

safeguarded by a non-political, rigidly civil-service meat inspection force. 
Until that time comes, we are all of us likely to eat at some time 
other third-class meat, bought at first-class pric i under a dra 

law. 

On the whole, we have no moral right to withhold a valuable food 
product because there stands in the way certain popular misconceptions. 
Our aesthetic sense is purely subjective, depending on individual and 
racial characters. It would be autocratic to attempt to embody in statutes 
the attitude of the most fastidious. Individuals should be free to choose, 
and not be burdened by the subjective prejudices of others. In the case 
of our milk supply, standards based on nutritive values are becoming 
insignificant as compared with hygienic standards; so, with meat, the 
nutritive and assthetic values will have to give way to standards measur- 
ing freedom from disease-producing elements. I do not mean that we 
should not establish and enforce standards of nutritive values, but they 
must not be permitted to overshadow the steadily growing importance of 
hygienic standards forced upon us by the increasing complexity of 
every-day life. 

In conclusion, let me summarize the principles I have endeavored to 
bring before you as follows : — 

1. There are few animals either ideally sound or wholly free from 
disease germs or parasites. 

2. The line to be drawn between normal and suspicious or infected 
meat is not absolutely fixed, but depends on the nature and stage of the 
disease process. 

3. In very few diseased conditions would the thoroughly cooked meat, 
if eaten, produce disease in man. 

4. Animals affected with certain diseases are rejected in toto because 
the handling may infect man or disseminate the disease. Animals 
affected with other diseases are rejected partly because our general 
standards of healthy meat are relatively high, partly because such dis- 
eases may be disseminated by the meat and infect other animals. 

5. The proportion of harmless meat from diseased animals excluded 
from consumption in the future will probably depend more or less on 
the relative scarcity of meat. With the shrinking of supplies we may 
eventually approximate the regulations now in force in Germany, which 
permit a larger freedom in the use of meat from diseased animals than 
we do. 

6. Proper inspection demands well-trained inspectors, and these are 
most economically employed in large public abattoirs. 

7. To utilize our meat products most efficiently they should be classi- 
fied, and meat from certain diseased animals now rejected entirely 
should be sold under suitable restrictions after sterilization. 



t'U a 



MONTHLY l 9 J BULLETIN 




; 



OF THI 



STATE BOAED OF HEALTH 



OF 



MASSACHUSETTS. 



An official publication of the State Board of Health of Massachusetts, issued monthly 
from the office of the Board, 145 State House, Boston, Mass. 



New Series. NOVEMBER, 1909. Vol.4. No. 11. 



Entered at the Post-office at Boston, Feb. 15, 1906, as Second-class Matter, act 

of July 16, 1894. 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. 



HENRY P. WALCOTT, M.D., Cambridge, Chairman. 



JULIAN A. MEAD, M.D., Watertown. 
HIRAM P. MILLS, C.E., Lawrence. 
GERARD C. TOBEY, Esq., Wareham. 



JAMES W. HULL, Pittsfield. 
CHARLES H. PORTER, Quincy. 
ROBERT W. LOYETT, M.D., Boston. 



MARK W. RICHARDSON, M.D., Secretary. 



BOSTON: 

WEIGHT & POTTEE PEINTING CO., STATE PEINTEES, 

18 Post Office Square. 

1909. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



Page 

Weekly returns of deaths from cities and towns of more than 10,000 population, . 233 

Weekly returns of deaths from certain infectious diseases, 237 

Weekly returns of cases of infectious diseases, 238 

Monthly report on inspection of food and drugs, ....... 238 

Prosecutions for violations of the law relating to food and drugs, .... 239 

List of adulterated foods, etc., for Novemher, 1909, 240 

Inspection of dairies, 242 

Death in school drinking cups, 244 

Proprietary preparations advertised as unsalable in Novemher, 1909, . . . 248 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CITIES AND TOWNS 
OF MORE THAN 10,000 POPULATION. 



Wkek ENDING Nov. 6, 1909. 





o 


a 


> 




IJKATHS 


FROM 








H 






















te 






,• 






li *■■ 


q 


73 




c . 






-- 




CITIES AND TOWNS. 


c «£ 




~ 


_~" 


3 s 




« 


C 






53*0 


■o 


~ <n 


« s . 


►J 2 


„ 


B 


■s'* 


• 




os <y 


~ JZ 




















cS 


— 0» 


©51 x 


gjj 


J 


si 


3 


a 




§3 


g-w 






5*H 


jS 




r- 


•z 




04 


M 


a 


Ol, 


■< 




a 


- 


m 


Boston 


624,491 


216 


46 


77 


30 


31 


3 


_ 


2 


Worcester, 








136,476 


32 


9 


9 


'5 


1 


2 


_ 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


47 


24 


23 


6 


4 


_ 


1 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


31 


7 


13 


4 


6 


1 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96, .'580 


38 


11 


10 


2 


5 


3 


_ 


- 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


30 


17 


12 


3 


2 


_ 


1 


- 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


15 


4 


2 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


22 


2 


8 


4 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


31 


10 


8 


• 5 


_ 


_ 


1 


- 


Somerville, 








76,049 


14 


6 


8 


3 


_ 


_ 


1 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


13 


3 


4 


1 


1 


_ 


- 


- 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


17 


5 


5 


2 


o 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


6 


1 


2 


- 


i 


- 


1 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


6 


3 


1 


- 


1 


- 




- 


Newton, 








39,642 


12 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


6 


2 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


11 


3 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


- 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


14 


1 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


8 


1 


3 


- 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


6 





3 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


20 


5 


9 


8 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


9 





- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


7 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


6 


- 


2 


1 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


6 


2 














Northampton, 








21,075 


6 


1 














Chicopee, . 








21,049 


12 


7 


a 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


8 


1 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


7 


3 


2 


-■ 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


6 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


3 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


2 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


4 


2 


4 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


3 


1 














Woburn, 








14,522 


3 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


7 

















Attleborough, 








13,913 


5 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


5 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


8 


4 


2 


1 


_ 


_ 


1 


- 


Milford, 








12,722 


1 

















Watertown , 








12,676 


2 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


3 

















Framingham, 








11,749 


7 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


1 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


1 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,379,468 



725 



194 



227 



86 66 



12 



i The populations were estimated upon the rate of growth from 1900 to 1905. Those of Taunton. 
Gloucester, North Adams and Clinton were allowed to stand as in 1905, having shown no increase 
during the live-year period. The gain in the population of Lowell is due to" the annexation of a 
part of the town of Tewkshury. The population of Lawrence hy the census of 1905 was 70,050, but, 
owing to the building of the new Wood and Arlington mills, an increase of about 8,000 is estimated 
by the Lawrence Board of Health, or 7S.000. 



234 



Week ending Nov. 13, 1909. 



CITIES AND TOWNS. 



Boston, 

Worcester, 

Fall River, 

Cambridge, 

Lowell, 

New Bedford, 

Lynn, . 

Springfield, 

Lawrence, . 

Somerville, 

Brockton, . 

Holyoke, . 

Maiden, 

Chelsea, 

Newton, 

Salem, 

Haverhill, . 

Fitchburg, . 

Everett, . 

Quincy, 

Taunton, . 

Waltham, . 

Pittsfield, . 

Brook line, . 

Gloucester, 

North Adams, 

Northampton, 

Chicopee, . 

Medford, . 

Beverly, 

Leominster, 

Hyde Park, 

Melrose, 

Newburyport, 

Revere, 

Westfield, . 

Woburn, 

Peabody, . 

Marlborough, 

Attleborough, 

Adams, 

Clinton, 

Gardner, . 

Mil ford, . 

Watertown, 

Plymouth, . 

Southbridge, 

Weymouth, 

Framingham, 

Wakefield, 

Webster, . 

Arlington, . 

Greenfield, 



c <9 

S"3 



624,491 
1X6,476 
106,486 
102,112 
96,380 
85,516 
84,623 
84,237 
78,000 
76,049 
55,039 
53,590 
41,941 
40,080 
39,642 
39,019 
38,362 
34,263 
33,597 
31,937 
30,967 
28,761 
27,932 
26,674 
26,011 
22,150 
21,075 
21,049 
20,921 
16,386 
16,030 
15,609 
15,459 
14,834 
14,820 
14,750 
14,522 
14,512 
14,456 
13,913 
13,685 
13,105 
13,066 
12,722 
12,676 
12,514 
11,848 
11,798 
11,749 
11,124 
11,109 
10,520 
10,140 






173 

37 

36 

35 

19 

28 

23 

30 

25 

26 

15 

9 

10 

10 

10 

11 

9 

10 

8 

12 

15 

5 

6 

7 

5 

4 

4 

3 

5 

5 



Deaths fbom — 



SIS oa 



RecapitulatioJi. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,379,468 665 161 



I 
202 89 



.'.'2 



17 



235 



Week ending Nov. 20, 1909. 





i 


•5 


S 




IJKATH8 


FROM — 






a 


a 

3 










CITIES AND TOWNS. 


"3 ~ 


Ml 
3 » 




a 
B 
o 


> 






45S 


f-g 


sS 


Q._0 »i 


o % 


!£ 


a 


o 


o 




|I 


ga 


%>< 


— % * 


gS 


~ 


Q, C. 


g 






X 


— 


— 


< 


8< 


- r-' 


s 


Boston 


624,491 


175 


32 


54 


24 


12 


5 


1 


1 


Worcester, 








136,476 


39 


9 


15 


10 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


28 


13 


11 


2 


3 


- 


_ 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


27 


7 


9 


3 


3 


3 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


25 


10 


6 


2 


2 


1 


1 


- 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


27 


11 


10 


5 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


25 


5 


6 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


29 


10 


11 


2 


1 


5 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


12 


6 


5 


3 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Somerville, 








76,049 


18 


3 


7 


2 


3 


1 


_ 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


10 


5 


2 


1 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


12 


10 


6 


3 


- 


2 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


11 


2 


4 


2 


2 


- 


_ 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


13 


2 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


6 


2 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


7 


2 


4 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


17 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


14 


4 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


9 


2 


- 




- 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


5 


1 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


18 


2 


6 


3 


2 


- 


1 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


8 


- 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


6 


- 


3 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


8 


- 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


8 


1 


4 


- 


3 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


7 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


10 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


4 


3 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


3 


1 


- 




- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


7 


2 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


5 





1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


5 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


4 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


4 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


7 


1 


3 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


4 





2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


4 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


8 


2 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


7 





_ 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Mil ford, . 








12.722 


1 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


5 





- 




- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


4 


3 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


3 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 


3 


_ 


_ 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


- 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,379,468 661 



160 195 



86 45 21 



236 



Week ending Nov. 27, 1909. 





~ 


=. 


s 




Deaths 


'ROM 










d 

Ov 


u 














CITIES AND TOWNS. 


i.2 

COW 


bo 

B 
™ so 

•J §> 

03 




9 


s 

o 










c - 


'5- % 


2 » 






o 






- a 


£ « 




c ° a 




.C 


JZ 


A 






§-a 


6« 


i£ 


T~ z 


go 




c. 


p. 


OS 

9 




Ph 


K 


q 




< 


E 


5 


£" 


» 


P.oston, 


624,491 


191 


42 


74 


31 


25 


2 


2 


2 


"Worcester, 








136,476 


41 


11 


10 


6 


2 


2 


- 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


41 


17 


22 


8 


6 


1 


1 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


23 


8 


7 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


37 


12 


7 


4 


3 


- 


- 


- 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


31 


13 


7 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Lynn, 








84,623 


30 


5 


8 


3 


3 


1 


1 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


33 


7 


10 


3 


3 


- 


1 


- 


Lawrence, 








78,000 


26 


12 


10 


4 


4 


1 


- 


- 


Sornerville, 








76,049 


20 


5 


5 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


20 


4 


3 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


25 


8 


6 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


5 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


16 


2 


4 


- 


1 


1 


1 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


7 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


9 


5 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, 








38,362 


8 


o 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


11 


5 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


8 


1 


3 


- 


2 


1 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


10 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


12 


4 


4 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


5 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


7 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


5 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


6 


2 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


5 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


5 


2 


3 


- 


2 


1 


- 


- 


Med ford, . 








20,921 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, . 








16,386 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


8 


2 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


3 


- 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


2 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


7 


- 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


5 


- 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


2 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


5 


- 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


3 





2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


2 







1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


4 


1 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


5 


1 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


4 







- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, . 








12,722 


3 


1 




- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


7 


3 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, 








12,514 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


4 


1 




1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


"Weymouth, 








11,798 


5 







1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


3 


1 




- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, 








10,520 


4 


- 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10.140 


2 






~ 


- 


- 


- 


- 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,379,468 723 185 217 88 70 12 



237 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CERTAIN INFECTIOUS 

DISEASES. 



Deaths from Infectious Diseases not specifically mentioned in 
above Tables during the Weeks of Nov. 6, 13, 20 and 27, 1900. 









Webs ending — 


DISEASE. 


Place. 


Nov. 6. Nov. 13. 


Not. 20. Nov. 27. 


Cerebro-spinal meningitis, 


Boston, 
Springfield, 
New Bedford, 
Westfield, . 
Worcester, 




- 


1 
1 
1 


2 

1 
1 


1 
1 


Scarlet fever, .... 


Boston, 

Chelsea, 

Chicopee, . 

Fall River, 

Gardner, . 

Lynn,. 

New Bedford, 

Newton, 

Springfield, 




1 

1 

1 
2 

1 


1 


1 

1 
1 

1 

1 


- 


Whooping cough, 


Boston, 

New Bedford, . 

Springfield, 


1 


1 


1 
1 




Boston, 

Cambridge, 

Springfield, 


- 


1 




1 
1 


Tuberculosis, other than pul- 
monary. 


Arlington, 

Boston, 

Brockton, . 

Brookline, 

Cambridge, 

Chelsea, 

Haverhill, 

Lawrence, . 

Milford, . 

North Adams, 

Revere, 

Salem, 

Somerville, 

Springfield, 




1 
1 

1. 

1 

1 
1 


8 

2 
1 

1 


1 
2 

1 
1 


1 

1 

1 

1 
1 

1 




Boston, 
Hyde Park, 
Springfield, 


- 


- 


1 1 
1 

1 


Meningitis other than cerebro- 
spinal. 


Maiden, 
Gloucester, 


- 


- 


1 
1 


Anterior poliomyelitis, 


Quincy, 


1 


1 



l':w 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF CASES OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES. 



Cases of Infectious Diseases reported during the Weeks of Nov, 
6, 13, 20 and 27, 1909. 

[Unilcr the provisions of section G2 of chapter 75 of the Revised Laws.] 



Wekk ending — 



Diphtheria, 

Measles, 

Scarlet fever, 

Typhoid fever, .... 
Tuberculosis, pulmonary, . 
Corebro-spinal meningitis, . 
Whooping cough, .... 

Varicella, 

Erysipelas, 

Mumps, 

Ophthalmia neonatorum, 
Tuberculosis other than pulmonary, 
Trachoma, ..... 

Tetanus, 

Anterior poliomyelitis, 
Malignant pustule, 



209 

127 

131 

75 

183 

2 

10 

33 



218 
2o:-i 
127 
82 
139 
2 

17 
37 



234 

144 

145 

77 

144 

5 

17 

57 



214 

214 

131 

52 

125 

1 

14 

60 



MONTHLY REPORT ON INSPECTION OF FOOD AND DRUGS. 



The following summary presents the results of the examination of food 
and drugs made by the State Board of Health during the month of 
November, 1909 : — 



Articles examined. 



Number 
found 

to be of 
Good 

Quality. 



Butter, . 

Canned fruit and 

vegetables, 
Cheese, . 
Cider, . 
Cocoa, . 
Condensed milk, 
Cream, . 
Cream of tartar, 
Dried fruits, 
Drugs, . 
Flavoring ex 

tracts, 
Honey, . 
Horse-radish, 
Jams and jellies, 
Malt extract, 



4 
1 
4 
1 
1 

1 
23 

si 



19 



Number 

adulterated 

or varying 

from the 

Legal 
Standard. 



33 
17 



2 

ID 



Articles examined. 



Number 
found 

to be of 
Good 

Quality. 



Maple syrup, 
Meat products, 
Hamburg steak, 
Milk, . 
Noodles, 
Proprietary foods 
Olive oil, 
Pastry, . 
Pickles, 
Spices, . 
Syrups, 
Table sauces, 
Vinegar, 
Wine, . 

Total, . 



17 
4 
336 
2 
1 
9 
6 
3 



553 



Number 

adulterated 
or varying 
from the 

Legal 
Standard. 



2 

83 



144 



17 

6 

419 



697 



239 



The samples of drugs found to he adulterated were: spirit of i 
spirit of camphor, spirit of peppermint, tincture of ginger and several 
proprietary preparations. 

The cities and towns in which samples were collected were: Abi] 
Andover, Athol, Attleborough, Arlington, Belmont, Beverly, Boston, 
Cambridge, Fall River, Framingham, Fitchburg, Gardner, Haverhill, 
Holyoke, Hyde Park, Lawrence, Lincoln, Lowell, Lynn, Maiden, ] ■'. 
ford, Melrose, Metlmen, Milford, Milton, North Andover, Norwood, 
Quincy, Eoyalston, Spencer, Springfield, Stoughton, Swampscott, Wal- 
tham, Warren, W^Tnouth, Westwood and Woburn. 



PROSECUTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW RELATING 
TO FOOD AND DRUGS. 



Seventeen convictions were secured during the month of November, 
1909, for selling adulterated food and drugs, as follows : — 



Same of Defendant. 



Character of Article sold. 



George L. Averill, 
Orrin H. Keith, . 
Orrin H Keith, . 
Aharon Kashian, . 
Aharon Kasbian, . 
William A. Kimball, 
Daniel L. Reynolds, 
Daniel L. Reynolds, 
Anthony Rogers, . 
Anthony Rogers, . 
Daniel Riley. 
William H. Wakefield, 
Julius Shubert, 

Emery M. Willard, 

Curtis W. Luud, . 

Frank I. Pierson, . 

Herbert J. Turcotte, 



Andover, 
Attleborough, 
Attleborough, 
West Andover, 
West Andover, 
Stoughton, 
Haverhill, 
Haverhill, 
North Andover, 
North Andover, 
Weymouth, . 
Spencer, 
Boston, . 

Boston, . 

Hyde Park, . 

Leominster, . 

Lowell, . 



Milk (total solids, 10.91). 
Milk (total solids, ll.Ofi), 
Milk (total solids, 11.13). 
Milk (total solids, 10.10). 
Milk (total solids, 10. *6). 
Milk (total solids, 11.70). 
Milk (total solids, 11.12) 
Milk (total solids, 11.12). 
Milk (total solids, 10.48), 
Milk (total solids, 10.53). 
Milk (total solids, 10.16) .V 
Milk (total solids. 11.10) . 2 , 3 
Spirit of anise, 52 per cent., 

U.S.P. 
Spirit of camphor, 5 per 

cent.. U.S.P. 5 
Spirit of peppermint, 71 per 

cent., U.S.P. 
Tincture of iodine. 4P per 

cent., U.S.P. 
Tincture of iodine, 56 per 

cent., U.S.P. 



i Skimmed. 

Fines imposed, $540. 



- Watered. 



Appealed. 



240 



























































CD 


CD 


CD 


-. 


CD 


O 












eg S 


c- 


















O 


O 


CO 


CO 


CO 


O 


CO 




CO 




CO CO 


S 


















Ut 


M 


Ui 


tH 


tH 


14 


tH 




— 




^ fe 


tH 


















CO 


CO 


CD 


"_' 


CO 


as 


c^ 




CO 




00 OS 


© 


















ft 


Pi 


ft 


~ 




ft 


a. 








ft a. 























^ 


O 


p 








10 




SO 




<= S 


»o 


















-* 


t* 


CO 


°°. 


CO 


cr. 


Tl 




CO 




•r O 


co 


















CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


■* 


>-( 


•* 




^< 




CO M 


■ri 


3 


3 






.3 "0 o"o 


"o 


O 




£- 


■S3 


■3 


.2 


<g 


c: 


•S 




.£ 




j« .2 


^: 




o 






oja^a^a 




.a 




























09 


CD 






CO c o o 


O 



















43 




















•-3 _5o_5j 


CO 


CO 












a 

CD 
















■<Cj 
o 


OS 


_; 


_; 


."3 "SIS 


"3 


"3 




CO 
CO 





US 

c «j t: 


as 

CO 


CO . 

• CO tn 




tH 


CD 
CO 


t^ 


5 OS 
W m ° 




3 


© 
«o 




'o 

-d 


© co co 


co 


a 

CO 




CO 

ft 


CO be 

ti CO 
? ft 


co bi 


t- 

— 




CD 


I 

3 


— 
CD 


1. 


«9k 

tS co 

ft .- =- 


1, 
_ ■- - 

08 as 03 






CD 


CO 


^ cj co 





CO 




fe 




fe 


-OCd 

O "O _=; 
2 °* rS 






e 


■P- 


ft ft ft 


M 


0) 

Cm 
CS 


CO 
CO 

a 
o 


® 5 (_, J_, tn 

S o. co co co 

5 a. a- a. 

O CM 


(-1 

CO 

ft 


CD 

ft 








d2 
as . 


d r. »d 
^ 


CC 


d ti 
• 
— N 


I- 


d 


-1" 

-r 

cm" 


— 


c _- — 


SP OS a; 

■a "a 




1Q 


© 


O OS "? r -°- °. 


CM 


n . 




* 


3 ^ 


■~ "d 


1-1 


■s '"' 




■c 


T— 


~ 


1-1 p- 1-1 




ti 




O t-CC t- CD 


as 


CM 




I 


co .a 


d'a r d 

CO •- CO 


K 


CO 

£ 2 


■at'; 

CDj-j CC 


*r. 


L 


DC 


d 


CO _ CO 

> — _ ■ — 

.a © — 


dns'd 




<B 

a 


_a 


CO 


CO CO CO CO 

a a a _a 


CO 


as 




CO 


5*3 

03 <n 


^ k ^ 




CO 


53 

03 M 


S ° £ 


O 
CO 


= 


O 

eg 


| 


vc '- 7. 


3 M '3 




'8 


*s 


'5 


"3 °3 '3 '3 


"3 


'3 








a^3 a 


_ 


■S^- 


^•—i - 




♦; 


M 


w 


— 'if — 


"tf — tf 




+» 






















E --' E 
















a 




a 


a a a a 


a 


a 






O rj 


Ou 




^ 


O ii C 




c 




c 


Xi O a 


0^0 




o 


o 


o 


0000 













CO 


Co 








CO w 


O 


CO 


Z 


CO 


O « c 


co 




O 


O 


OOOOQ 


O 


O 




H 


H 


H 


tH 


H 


H 


H 




H 




H H 


H 




t* 




















































fc 






.... 


• 








• 




























1 






1 




























■* 


O 






' ' r 




























* 




s 
■a 
o 


1 






.1-5 . . 


. 










CO 






, 










„ 




M 


fc 








CO 

cS 








. 


CO 

ci 
















CO 

CO 
CS 




O 
t. 


a 

cj 
ft 

a 

o 

g 

!* 
•5 

o 
O 
>d 






tH 


a 






CO 


00 

CO 




co~ 


• 










s 










5 s 








CO 


03 


Ph" 




















o 

tH 

s 


6 
O 




• co ja 

5S£§ 
«^«; 

- >> - a 

x a u 3 

-a §S ft 

® -co S 

fe a 

,"? SO 


a" 
a 
t>» 

t£ 

a 

cj 
ft 

a 


Q 


1 




cS 
CO 

> 


a 

< 


CO 

CO 

CO 

ft 

02 

r a 
"co 


CO 
!> 
O 

-d 

a 
< 

O 




03 
& 

d 



a 

09 


»3 

CO 

e3 

tT 

CO 

a 














en 

© 

"3 




3 


o 
o 
En 


=3 




g «& a 

O c c3 






14 




ca 

CD 


"3 





CO 

ci 


t. 

c4 
O 










© 
ao 




* 


03 


CO 




cc o^_-i: 


a 








w 

a 


EC 




H 












£ 




1 


tH 

3 
P4 


a 

cj 








ft 

a 






CO 
M 
CD 

bo 






>H 

CO 


co" 

CO 

tH 












2 

5 




fc 


tH 
O 


m 
















M 


hs 




s 


§ 
















t* 

co 




cS 






ft 


cS 


CO 

c3 







w 














& 




»SOO 


CO 






CO 


^2 


"co 




— 


^ 










a 






© 


^ 




J3 . . . 


5 







Ha 


^ 


s 




Q 


as 

Q 










9 
W 






^"d 


DQ 


o" 


" ' '.2 


1 




■d 






















• 




| 


.a a 

t- 
o >, 


n 

<c 

ft 


a 

•£ 

cS 


tfB --ft 

co >>D5 >, 


O 

O 


CO 
CO 

a 



a 
a 

ft 




• 






• 
















co 
o 


© 

cad 


o 
a 

B 


O 
QQ 

• «3 

CO > 




CO 

O 


a 




3 • 

C3 • 


• 


• 






• 










• 




t. 
03 




^.ft 


1? 


c a 
ft^ 

w 


d 
s 


ft 
co ^ 
























X5 

5 


c3 O 

c?b 


o o 


2 ~ c« O c3 CO 


<1 


Si 
































































•Sv-o. 

Bog 


00 
IN 


.-H 


co <M 35 o -e 


C2 


CO 




CO 

CO 

CO 


CO 


t-i 

CO 

Cs 


OS 

pa. 


c 
eo 


CO 


s 








S5 S5 

00 CM 


CO 


5 s 


CO 


I— 


t— t~ uo cc co 


co 


t- 




CO 




CO 


X 


CO 


tH 






-r 




rf O 


10 


S5 EC 


© 


cc 


(Ct~Ot-t- 


1— 


t- 






co 







c 




















tH 


n fl H C! N 


CM 


CM 




CT 1 


CM 


z? 


1-1 


rH 


CO 


c: 




CO 




CO CO 


CO 






ft ft 



•a « 43 



Sh (-1 ^ 



in "^ ^ ° ;^ !£ ;!5 © 

© «-J K C! ^ 0". >rt gj 

CC CI 3 CI 3 C> 3 ,-J 

rt "eS ^ c: ^ d a- 1 ■£* 

9 si'S^ci'S 



o> ._, oa 

T3 o ^3 ; 



'O'S'a'S 



Q , C3 



O 'o 



<b B 1) 3 © fl n 
Ph ® ft HI P< 05 <D 
O o Oft 

H [_, C I u CO .. 



r* e t 1 a in hi 



o « 



o « o « 



o « 

H ! 



. OS -W -tH „iH „ H 

oS h 5 ^5 ^iS m 
* H H H H 



a S 



S "1 ^ § 

■„- m § a 

5 s 3 O 

<j j « S 

* 1 «: ■ 






O Q 



S a S S 



N 5 H 



tf !zi fc fc 



241 



242 



INSPECTION OF DAIRIES. 



During the month of November, 1909, 163 dairies supplying milk for 
public sale in Massachusetts were examined. All but 15 of the number 
are situated in Connecticut and Rhode Island. The Massachusetts dairies 
yielded the following data : — 



Flack. 


Number 
examined. 


Number found 

to present „ ,, 
no Objectionable * er Lent - 
Features. 


Number to 
which Letters 1 Per Cent, 
were sent. 


Hamilton 

Second inspection, 
Lancaster, .... 

Second inspection, . 


1 
14 


1 
11 


100.00 
78.57 


3 21.43 



Total number of dairies examined, (including those in Connecticut and Rhode 

Island), 163 

Number found to be free from objectionable conditions, !>2 

Number to which letters were sent, 71 

Total number of conditions to which attention was called, 197 

Percentage of dairies which passed inspection, 56.44 

The names of the owners of the dairies in Massachusetts found to be 
worthy of commendation follow : — 



Hamilton. 

Norman, Maxwell*! 



Blood, W. H.* 
Cunningham, Edward * 
Gilmore, John * 
Howe, John W.* 



Lancaster. 

Lancaster Town Farm *f 
McClintock, M. M.* 
Schumacher, C. A.* 
Sullivan, Estate of John *t 



"Warren, Charles * 
Whittemore, M. M* 
"Willard, George * 



* Second inspection. 



t Reported favorably on first inspection. 






243 



Connecticut Dairies. 







Number found 








Place. 


Number 
examined. 


to present 

no Objeciionable 

Features. 


Per Cent. 


N timber to 

which Letters 

were tent. 


Per Cent. 


Ashford, .... 








_ 




Second inspection, 






4 


1 


25.00 


3 


75. 00 


Brooklyn, 






- 


- 


- 




- 


Second inspection, 






3 


- 


- 


3 


100.00 


Chaplin, 






- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Second inspection, 






14 


10 


71.43 


4 


28 57 


Columbia, 






- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Second inspection, 






3 


2 


m 67 


1 


33.33 


Coventry, 






2 


1 


oi). CO 


1 


50.00 


Second inspection, 






7 


5 


71.43 


2 


28.57 


Eastford, 






- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Second inspection, 






7 


5 


71.43 


2 


28.57 


Hampton, 






- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Second inspection, 






20 


3 


15.00 


17 


85.00 


Lebanon, 






- 


- 


- 




- 


Second inspection, 






1 


1 


100.00 


- 


- 


Mansfield, 






- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Second inspection, 






9 


5 


55.56 


4 


44.44 


Pomfret, 






- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Second inspection, 






17 


4 


23 53 


13 


76.47 


Scotland, 






- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Second inspection, 






3 


- 


- 


3 


100.00 


Windham, 






- 


- 




- 


- 


Second inspection, 






2 


1 


50.00 


1 


50.00 



Total number of Connecticut dairies examined, . 
Number found to he free from objectionable conditions, 
Number to which letters were sent, .... 
Total number of conditions to which attention was called, 
Percentage of dairies which passed inspection, 



92 

38 

54 

151 

41.30 



Rhode Island Dairies. 



Place. 


Number 
examined. 


Number found 

to present 

no Objectionable 

Features. 


Per Cent. 


Number to 

which Letters 

were sent. 


Per Cent. 


Little Compton, 

Second inspection, 
Portsmouth, .... 

Second inspection, 
Tiverton, .... 

Second inspection, 


4 

18 

1 

5 

7 
21 


2 
16 
1 
5 
2 
16 


50.00 
88.89 
100.00 
100.00 
28.57 
76.19 


2 

2 

5 
5 


50 00 
11.11 

71.43 

23.81 



Total number of Rhode Island dairies examined, 
Number found to be free from objectionable conditions, 
Number to which letters were sent, .... 

Total number of conditions to which attention was called, 
Percentage of dairies which passed inspection, 



56 
42 
14 
37 
lb. 00 






244 



DEATH IN SCHOOL DRINKING CUPS. 



By Alvin Davison, M.S., Ph.D., Pi-ofexsor of Blolof/y in Lafayette College, and author 
of" The Human Body and Health." 



The greatest achievement of science in the opening decade of the 
twentieth century is the awakening of the people to the fact that most 
human diseases are preventable and a large proportion of early deaths 
avoidable. At least 700,000 of the million and a half deaths occurring 
annually in the United States result from the niinute parasitic plants and 
animals gaining access to the body. These invisible foes wage a continual 
warfare against both strong and weak, rich and poor. Civic duty as well 
as self preservation demands that these life-destroyers should, as far as 
possible, be shut out of the human system. 

The death rate in any localit} r or country is usually a true index of the 
habits and education of the people in reference to the protection of health. 
In benighted Spain, 27 out of every 1,000 inhabitants perish annually, 
while in enlightened Norway, death claims yearly onty 14 of each 1,000 
residents. In New Orleans, the death rate among the colored people is 41 
per 1,000, while among the white race it is only 21 per 1,000. Ignorance 
and negligence in regard to the laws of sanitation invite sickness and 
death. 

The chief avenue by which bacteria enter the body is the mouth. The 
air, food, water, and especially the drinking cup are the usual means by 
which the disease-producing parasites are transferred from one person to 
another. The purpose of this paper is to consider only the latter in its 
relation to health. 

The evidence condemning the use of the common drinking vessel upon 
any occasion, whether at school, church or home, is derived from three 
sources : ( 1 ) the frequent presence of disease-producing bacteria in the 
mouth; (2) the detection of pathogenic germs on the public cups; and 
(3) the discovery that where a number of persons drank from a cup 
previously used by the sick, some of them became ill. 

Recent investigations show that the germs of diphtheria and grippe 
frequently remain from one to three months in the mouths of the pa- 
tients after they have recovered from the disease. The very extensive 
and careful observations of the Minnesota State Board of Health demon- 
strated that in over half of the diphtheria cases virulent germs remained 
in the nose and throat of the patients three weeks after recovery. Most 

i Kcprinted from the "Technical World Magazine " for August, 190S. 



245 

careful examinations by expert bacteriologists show that many of the 
common sore throats are really light cases of diphtheria. Of the '.',038 
mild sore throats examined in the school children of Hartford, Conn., 501 
were shown to be due to the true diphtheria germ. The bacilli now uni- 
versally employed in the making of diphtheria antitoxin were first isolated 
from a mild sore throat. Bacteria which in one person cause only slight 
illness may when transferred to another individual produce serious dis- 
ease and death. This widely different effect of the same germ may be due 
to the variation in the germ-killing power of the body tissues, or it may 
result from new association with other germs. 

It is an established fact that a considerable number of well persons 
harbor in their mouths the germs of grippe, pneumonia, diphtheria and. 
tonsilitis. Examination of 4,250 persons by the Massachusetts Associa- 
tion of the Boards of Health showed that over 100 of them carried, in 
their mouths virulent diphtheria germs. Pennington in 1907 found 
virulent diphtheria bacilli in nearly 5 per cent, of a large number of 
apparently healthy school- children in Philadelphia. In Minnesota, true 
diphtheria germs were found in the mouths of 70 persons in every 1,000 
examined. The average results of a large number of investigations 
demonstrate that nearly 1 per cent, of well persons carry in their mouths 
true diphtheria germs. In Boston, 60 per cent, of all cases of common 
catarrh examined showed the presence of grippe bacilli. Considerable 
evidence is at hand showing that the germs of sore throat, pneumonia and. 
bronchitis are present in many people who mingle with the well and drink 
from the public cups. 

During the past six months I have investigated, by means of direct 
microscopic examination, by cultures and by guinea pig injections, the 
deposits present on various public drinking vessels. Cup No. 1, which had 
been in use nine days in a school, was a clear thin glass. It was broken 
into a number of pieces and properly stained for examination with a 
microscope magnifying 1,000 diameters. The human cells scraped from 
the lips of the drinkers were so numerous on the upper third of the glass 
that the head of a pin could not be placed anywhere without touching 
several of these bits of skin. The saliva, by running down on the inside 
of the glass, had carried cells and bacteria to the bottom. Here, however, 
they were less than one-third as abundant as at the brim. 

By counting the cells present on fifty different areas on the glass as 
seen under the microscope, it was estimated that the cup contained over 
20,000 human cells or bits of dead skin. As many as 150 germs were seen 
clinging to a single cell, and very few cells showed less than 10 germs. 
Between the cells were thousands of germs, left there by the smears of 
saliva deposited by the drinkers. Not less than 100,000 bacteria were 



246 

present on every square inch of the glass. Most of these were of the 
harmless kind, abundant in the mouth, but some were apparently 
the germs of decay, feeding upon the bits of the human body adhering to 
the cup. 

In order to determine how much material each drinker is likely to leave 
on the cup, I requested 10 boys to apply the upper lip to pieces of clean 
flat glass in the same way as they touched the cup in drinking. These 
glass slips thus soiled were properly stained for microscopic examination, 
which showed an average of about 100 cells and 75,000 bacteria to each 
slip. 

The results of the examination of cups Xos. 2 and 3, taken from a 
schoolroom, were similar to those of No. 1. Cup Xo. 1, which had been 
apparently in use for several months without being washed, was secured 
from a high school. It was lined inside with a thin brownish deposit. 
This was washed off with 10 cubic centimeters of sterile water and a 
sterile swab, and the washings were then placed in a conical tube, which 
was put into a centrifuge and rotated rapidly until all the solid matter- 
settled to the bottom. By spreading this sediment over a half-square 
inch of each of twenty-two slides, and staining it, the characteristic 
features were easily made out under the microscope. Particles of mud, 
thousands of pieces of skin from the mouth, and millions of bacteria 
constituted the mass. To determine whether any of these germs belonged 
to the disease-producing group, ten of the slides were treated with the 
stain and acid, serving to show the characteristics of Bacillus tuberculosis. 
On one of these slides was clearly shown a clump of scores of germs cor- 
responding in all details to those of tuberculosis. As occasionally other 
germs are met with having the same staining qualities and microscopic 
appearance as those of tuberculosis, I procured another cup from the 
same school, to apply the final test for detecting those relentless enemies 
which prey upon human flesh and add daily to the city of the dead in our 
own land victims to the number of 400. 

The washings from this cup were sedimented in the centrifuge tube. 
One-third of the sediment was injected under the skin of a healthy guinea 
pig, and another third was used in inoculating a second guinea pig. The 
first animal died fort3 r hours after receiving the injection. A microscopic 
examination of the blood in the heart revealed the presence of numerous 
pneumonia germs, which, when planted on blood serum and agar kept in 
an incubator at body temperature for two days, developed the character- 
istic growth of Fraenkel's pneumococcus. This experiment gave un- 
doubted evidence that the germs of pneumonia had been present in 
sufficient numbers in the cup to cause blood poisoning or septicemic 
pneumonia in the animal. 



247 

The second guinea pig injected with the cup sediment was killed five 
weeks later. The autopsy revealed numerous tubercular foci in the liver 
and several much enlarged tubercular lymph glands. Microscopic exam- 
ination of the diseased tissues proved the presence of the true bacillus 
tuberculosis. By careful inquiry it was learned that several pupils in 
the school from which the tubercle-bearing cups were secured were then 
sufferers from tuberculosis. In the light of recent discoveries, showing 
that tuberculosis is not usually acquired by inhaling the germs but by 
receiving them with food or by mouth contact with objects soiled with 
tubercular deposits, does it not seem probable that the drinking cup may 
very often serve as the transmitter of the white plague? Dr. Anders of 
Philadelphia by means of guinea pig inoculations demonstrated the pres- 
ence of tubercle bacilli in two out of five specimens from the dregs of 
common communion cups. 

In order to make a further study of the germs, a third portion of the 
sediment from cup No. 5 was planted in culture media serving to isolate 
the various kinds of bacteria so that the characters of each might be 
observed. Ten different species were thus separated and examined. 
Streptococci apparently the same as those occurring in sore throat and 
tonsilitis were present, as was also the common pus germ staphylococcus 
aureus. Dr. Anders has reported the discovery on the communion cups 
from a Philadelphia church of numerous pus germs as well as pus cells. 

The microscopical examination of cups 3STos. 6 and 7, secured from a 
railway station and a club-house, showed numerous cells from the lips, 
and thousands of bacteria present in the upper portion of the vessels, 
although they appeared quite clean to the naked eye. Cup No. 8, taken 
from a railway station, was the only vessel examined that could be called 
reasonably clean. Its surface carried only two or three human cells to 
the square inch, and upon the same area were less than 500 bacteria. 

A third source of evidence condemning the public cup is found in the 
report of Dr. Forbes of Eochester, who refers to an epidemic of diphtheria 
in his city which occurred among 24 persons, and was traced unmistakably 
to a common drinking cup which all the sick had used. Tonsilitis and 
sore throat are known to affect a larger number of pupils in schools Avhere 
a common drinking cup is used than in those schools where the individual 
cup is required, or the sanitary drinking fountain has been installed. 

The mortality statistics of the census bureau show that diphtheria, 
meningitis, bronchitis, tuberculosis, pneumonia and grippe, all of which 
are likely to be acquired by the use of the common cup, are responsible 
for nearly 400,000 deaths annually in the United States. This fact 
indicates that the germs of these diseases produce in a single year more 
than a million cases of serious illness. The financial loss to the countrv, 



2^8 

and the mental anguish as well as bodily suffering due to these prevent- 
able diseases, call loudly for the banishment of the unsanitary and filthy 
common communion cup as well as the public drinking vessel, befouled 
with human excretions shielding the darts of death. 

More than 10,000 churches have now adopted the individual commun- 
ion cups, and many schools either provide a sanitary drinking fountain or 
require the pupils to use individual cups. In many places in Germany 
pasteboard cups are furnished, which after being once used are destroyed. 
Wherever hygienic measures have been adopted in a community sickness 
and death have decreased. By living more in accordance with the rules 
of hygiene Xew York City reduced her death rate from 25 per 1,000 to 
18 per 1,000 during the period from 1890 to 1905. Within the same 
years Chicago has reduced her death rate from 19 to 1-4 per 1,000. 

In Circular 127 of the Bureau of Animal Industry, issued April 4, 
1908, are these words : — 

The inhalation theory to account for the occurrence of pulmonary tuber- 
culosis has been shown to be no longer tenable, because no substance can -be 
carried into the finer bronchioles by the respiratory process, and because 
tuberculous lesions in the lung have been shown to spread from the vascular 
system, the finer capillaries, and not from the air passages. Dried and pul- 
verized tuberculous material has been shown to lack infectiousness, and the 
infectious spray discharged from the mouths of tuberculous persons during 
speaking and coughing has been shown to be of importance only in their im- 
mediate environment, unless such persons are permitted to handle articles of 
food, to which the larger droplets of the spray may adhere. The introduction 
of bacilli into the body through the uninjured wall of the digestive tract, any- 
where from the mouth downwards, is the chief mode of infection with tuber- 
culosis. 



PROPRIETARY PREPARATIONS ADVERTISED AS UNSALABLE 
IN NOVEMBER, 1909. 



Bok's Cold Tablets. Pierson Drug Company, Washington and Essex 
streets, Boston, Mass. (No statement of the percentage of acetanilid.) 

Royal Brand Cordial. New York Pure Food Cordial Company, New York, 
U. S. A., distributors. (No statement of the percentage of alcohol.) 



MONTHLY BULLETIN 



OF THE 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH 



OF 



MASSACHUSETTS. 



An official publication of the State Board of Health of Massachusetts, issued monthly 
from the office of the Board, 145 State House, Boston, Mass. 



New Series. DECEMBER, 1909. Vol. 4. No. 12. 



Entered at the Post-office at Boston, Feb. 15, 1906, as Second-class Mattek. Act 

of July 16, 1894. 



STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. 



HENRY P. WALCOTT, M.D., CAMBRIDGE, Chairman. 



JULIAN A. MEAD, M.D., Watertown. 
HIRAM F. MILLS, C.E., LAWRENCE. 
GERARD C. TOBEY, ESQ., WAREHAM. 



JAMES W. HULL, PlTTSFIELD. 
CHARLES H. PORTER, QuiNCY. 
ROBERT W. LOVETT, M.D., BOSTON. 



MARK W. RICHARDSON, M.D., Secretary. 



BOSTON: 

WEIGHT & POTTER PRINTING CO., STATE PRINTERS, 

18 Post Office Square. 

1909. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



Page 

Weekly returns of deaths from cities and towns of more than 10,000 population, . 251 

Weekly returns of deaths from certain infectious diseases, 255 

Weekly returns of cases of infectious diseases, ........ 256 

Monthly report on inspection of food and drugs, ....... 256 

Prosecutions for violations of the law relating to food and drugs, .... 257 

List of adulterated foods, etc., for December, 1909, 258 

Inspection of dairies 260 

Investigation of typhoid fever at Maynard, Mass., 262 

Animal diseases transmissible to man, 264 

Cereal in meat products, 276 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF DEATHS FROM CITIES AND TOWNS 
OF MORE THAN 10,000 POPULATION. 



Week ending Dec. l. 1909. 





•j 


•S 


t 




IJKATHS FROM 








"A 


5 














Cities and towns. 


~i 






£ 


£ 






•- «- 


*c 


~ cfl 


Z 3 ■ 


-S 


■ 


3 




^ 




■=«j 


il 


^ ~. 




o j; 


5 


■5 


c 


j. 




i B 


gs 


g£ 


= ; a 


C — • 




Sr 


p, 








— 


3 


CU 


< 


- 


o 


r- 


S3 


Boston, 


624,491 


185 


37 


5!i 


28 


n 


fi 


3 


_ 


Worcester, 








136,476 


31 


7' 


8 


- 


l 


:; 


2 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


21 


7 


8 


- 


:; 


- 


- 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


28 


fi 


14 


6 


5 


l 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








<«,M80 


35 


7 


14 


9 


5 


- 


- 


- 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


17 


4 


9 


2 


4 


l 


- 


- 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


23 


3 


8 


5 


1 


l 


1 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


25 


5 


8 


1 


4 


2 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


28 


9 


9 


5 


- 


1 


1 


- 


Somerville, 








76,049 


16 


4 


8 


4 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


12 


2 


5 


2 


2 




1 


- 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


13 


6 


4 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


12 


5 


3 


2 


1 


- 




- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


13 


3 


1 


- 


1 


- 




- 


Newton, 








39,642 


7 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


12 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


9 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


9 


- 


5 


1 


4 


- 




- 


Everett, 








33,597 


11 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 




- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


4 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


8 


1 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


7 


2 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


7 


3 


4 


1 


1 


2 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


4 


2 














Gloucester, 








26,011 


3 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


7 


1 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


9 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


10 


2 


4 


1- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


1 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


5 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


4 


1 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


3 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


2 

















Newburyport, 








14,834 


7 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


4 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


7 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, 








14,522 


5 





2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


5 


2 


2 


- 


- 


1 


1 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


3 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


7 


1 


3 


- 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


5 


3 


3 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, 








12,722 


3 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


Watertown, 








12,676 


3 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


3 


1 


3 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


2 





1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


4 


1 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


1 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


o 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 




10,140 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 



Recapitulation, 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,379,468 



643 



136 



210 



83 55 20 



i The populations were estimated upon the rate of growth from 1900 to 1905. Those of Taunton, 
Gloucester, North Adams and Clinton were allowed to stand as in 1905, having- shown no increase 
during the five-year period. The gain in the population of Lowell is due to the annexation of a 
part of the town of Tewksbury. The population of Lawrence by the census of 1905 was 70,050. but, 
owing to the building of the new Wood and Arlington mills, an increase of about 8,000 is estimated 
by the Lawrence Board of Health, or 7S,000. 



252 



Week ending Dec. 11, 1909. 





a 


= 


> 




D BATHS 


'BOM 








^g 




2 
















= i 








9 




CITIES AND TOWNS. 


e,o 


M 


= 


— "7 


Bg 




ej 


> 







|a 








1 

go 


JO 


O. 


~C 

a. 


e 
5 






« 


Q 


£ 


< 


- 


~ 


C' 


3 


Boston, 


024,491 


203 


41 


58 


22 


21 


8 


_ 


_ 


Worcester, 








186,476 


42 


7 


13 


8 


4 


- 


- 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


36 


14 


11 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


28 


3 


11 


6 


3 


1 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96,880 


27 


10 


8 


5 


2 


1 


- 


- 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


32 


10 


11 


5 


3 


2 


- 


- 


Lynn, . 








84,623 


25 


5 


6 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


28 


9 : 


7 


2 


1 


3 


- 


- 


Lawrence, . 








78,000 


14 


8 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Somerville, 








76,049 


16 





3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


13 


4 


3 


1 


- 


- 


2 


- 


Hoi, yoke, . 








53,590 


17 


8 


11 


4 


3 


- 


2 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


12 


3 


3 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


8 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


8 


2 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39.019 


8 


- 


3 


1 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Haverhill, . 








38,362 


8 


1 


2 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Fitchburg, . 








34.263 


6 


2 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Everett, . 








33,597 


3 


1 


2 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


7 


1 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


15 


5 


9 


4 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


7 


2 


2 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Pittsneld, . 








27,932 


10 


3 


4 


3 


- 


- 


1 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


8 


1 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


5 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


6 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


5 


3 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


7 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


3 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


3 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


2 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


~ 


Melrose, 








15,459 


1 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


3 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


" 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


4 


1 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Woburn, 








14,522 


6 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14.512 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,4.16 


2 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


2 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


4 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


3 


- 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, 








13,066 


4 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, . 








12,722 


7 


1 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


3 


1 


1 


1 


-• 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, . 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11, SIS 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


~ 


WeymoutE, 








11.7MS 


7 


1 


3 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


4 


- 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Wakefield, 








11.124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, . 








10,520 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,U(i 


6 


- 


2 


■-' 


" 


" 







Total >>f reporting towns, 



Recapitulation. 



2,379,468 



674 



L60 



200 



S7 54 21 



253 



Wmmm kmiin'. I»i i I -, 1909. 







* 

5 

9 






lir.ATIIH 


r««.K 




















0ITIB1 AMi TOWNS. 


n 

s a 


Q 
h 

u 


= 




Z. — 


i 

L 


£ 


- 






c 


s: 




— 


- 


E 


- 


S 


Boston, 


624 ,4'. il 


215 


63 


71 


26 


19 


4 


3 


1 


Worcester, 










186,476 


Xi 


8 


H 


■J 










Fall River, 










106,486 


28 


9 


'.' 


1 






_ 


_ 


Cambridge, 










102,112 


37 


2 


18 





in 


_ 


_ 




Lowell, 










96,380 


46 


23 


1') 


10 




1 


_ 




New Bedford, 










85,516 


38 


IT 


14 


1" 




1 


1 


_ 


Lynn,. 










84,623 


IK 


3 


7 


2 




1 




_ 


Springfield, 










H4/j:;7 


19 


9 


7 







- 


_ 


_ 


Lawrence, . 










78,000 


17 


8 


6 


- 




- 


_ 


_ 


Somerville, 










76,049 


15 





7 


3 




_ 


_ 


_ 


Brockton, . 










66,039 


13 


6 


1 


_ 




_ 




_ 


Holyoke, . 










63,690 


18 


2 


4 


1 




_ 


_ 


_ 


Maiden, 










41, '.Ml 


8 


2 


1 


1 




_ 






Chelsea, 










40,080 


12 




1 






_ 




_ 


Newton, 










39,642 


6 


1 


2 


1 




_ 




_ 


Salem, 










89,019 


11 


o 


1 


_ 




_ 


_ 


_ 


Haverhill, . 










38,362 


9 


2 


2 


_ 




1 






Fitchburg, 










34,263 


13 


6 


3 


_ 


_ 


2 


_ 


1 


Everett, 










33,697 


6 


1 


1 


- 


1 


_ 


_ 




Quincy, 










31,937 


8 


2 


4 


1 


3 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Taunton, . 










30,967 


18 


4 


:• 


4 


_ 


1 


_ 


_ 


Waltham, . 










28,761 


8 





2 


1 


_ 


_ 


1 


_ 


Pittsfield, . 










27, (132 


7 


1 


4 


1 


2 


_ 


1 




Brook line, . 










26,674 


8 


2 


1 


1 




_ 




_ 


Gloucester, 










26,011 


3 


1 


1 




1 


_ 




— 


North Adams, 










22,150 


10. 


1 


3 


1 


2 


_ 




_ 


Northampton, 










21,075 


7 


2 


3 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Chicopee, . 










21,049 


14 


6 


4 


•_> 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


Med ford, . 










20,021 


8 


4 


3 


1 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


Beverly, . 










16,386 


9 


- 


- 


- 




_ 


_ 


_ 


Leominster, » 










16,030 


6 


2 


2 


1 




1 


_ 




Hyde Park, 










16,609 


6 


1 


1 


1 


_ 




_ 


_ 


Melrose, 










15,459 


• > 





- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Newburyport, 










14,834 


5 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Revere, 










14,820 


3 


a 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 




Westfield, . 










14,750 


o 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 




Woburn, . 










14,622 


4 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


. 






Peabody, . 










14,512 


- 


_ 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Marlborough, 










14,456 


o 





- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Attleborough, 










13,913 


3 





1 


_ 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Adams, 










13,686 


4 


1 


1 


_ 


1 


_ 


_ 




Clinton, 










13,106 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 




Gardner, . 










13,066 


5 


1 


•_> 


_ 


1 


_ 


1 




Milford, 










12,722 





_ 


_ 


_ 




_ 






Watertown, 










12,676 





_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 






Plymouth, . 










12,514 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Southbridge, 










11,848 


4 


2 


2 


1 


_ 


1 


_ 




Weymouth, 










11,798 


4 





1 


_ 


_ 


1 


_ 




Framingham, 










11.749 


5 


_ 


2 


1 


1 


_ 


_ 


_ 


Wakefield, 










11.124 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 




_ 


_ 




Webster, . 










11,109 


- 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 


_ 




Arlington, . 










10,620 


•> 


_ 


1 


1 


_ 








Greenfield, 










10.140 


2 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


- 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2.379.468 714 196 220 



86 76 16 



254 



Week ending Dec. 25, 1909. 





s 


=■ 


m 




Deaths 


'ROM — 




o 




h 












X 7> 


be 






^ 




CITIES AND TOWNS. 


c o 

_c — 




•3 


CO » 


a 


to 


5 


9 


^ 










- s = 


zz 


~ 


a. 


a, 


03 






- 


a 




< 


£ 


z 


P 


^ 


Boston, 


624,491 


228 


62 


83 


40 


18 


8 


1 


1 


"Worcester, 








136,476 


33 


11 


14 


6 


4 


2 


- 


- 


Fall River, 








106,486 


34 


16 


9 


1 


3 


1 


2 


_ 


Cambridge, 








102,112 


32 


7 


15 


11 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Lowell, 








96,380 


35 


15 


9 


6 


- 


1 


- 


2 


New Bedford, 








85,516 


25 


8 


9 


5 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Lynn, 








84,623 


19 


4 


6 


3 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Springfield, 








84,237 


26 


1 


11 


4 


5 


- 


- 


- 


Lawrence, 








78,000 


31 


12 


14 


5 


4 


1 


- 


1 


Somerville, 








76,049 


19 


6 


5 


- 


2 


2 


- 


- 


Brockton, . 








55,039 


17 


3 


4 


- 


3 


- 


- 


- 


Holyoke, . 








53,590 


17 


7 


5 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Maiden, 








41,941 


10 


1 


3 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chelsea, 








40,080 


11 


1 


3 


1 


1 


1 


- 


- 


Newton, 








39,642 


9 


1 


3 


2 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Salem, 








39,019 


19 


3 


8 


4 


3 


1 


- 


- 


Haverhill, 








38,362 


18 


3 


6 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Fitchburg, 








34,263 


5 


2 


1 


- 


- 


1 


- 


- 


Everett, 








33,597 


9 


2 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Quincy, 








31,937 


6 


3 


2 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Taunton, . 








30,967 


12 


3 


7 


6 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Waltham, . 








28,761 


6 





1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Pittsfield, . 








27,932 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Brookline, . 








26,674 


5 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gloucester, 








26,011 


6 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


North Adams, 








22,150 


3 


1 


2 


- 


2 


- 


- 


- 


Northampton, 








21,075 


5 


1 


1 


- 


1 


- 


- 


- 


Chicopee, . 








21,049 


6 


4 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Medford, . 








20,921 


7 


- 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Beverly, 








16,386 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Leominster, 








16,030 


4 


2 


- 


- 


- 


,- 


- 


- 


Hyde Park, 








15,609 


2 


1 


2 




- 


1 


- 


- 


Melrose, 








15,459 


5 


2 


- 




- 


- 


- 


- 


Newburyport, 








14,834 


2 


- 


2 




1 


- 


- 


- 


Revere, 








14,820 


2 


1 


- 




- 


- 


- 


- 


Westfield, . 








14,750 


4 


- 


1 




- 


- 


- 


- 


Woburn, . 








14,522 


3 





1 




- 


- 


- 


- 


Peabody, . 








14,512 


- 


- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


- 


Marlborough, 








14,456 


6 


2 


2 




- 


1 


- 


- 


Attleborough, 








13,913 


3 





2 




1 


- 


- 


- 


Adams, 








13,685 


4 


- 


1 




- 


- 


- 


- 


Clinton, 








13,105 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Gardner, . 








13,066 


3 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Milford, 








12,722 


3 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Watertown, 








12,676 


5 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Plymouth, 








12,514 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Southbridge, 








11,848 


3 


2 


2 


- 


- 


- 


- 


2 


Weymouth, 








11,798 


1 





- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Framingham, 








11,749 


3 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


— 


Wakefield, 








11,124 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Webster, . 








11,109 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Arlington, 








10,520 


1 


- 


1 


1 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Greenfield, 








10,140 





- 


" 


~ 


— 


_ _ _ 



Recapitulation. 



Total of reporting towns, 



2,351,545 



711 191 241 115 59 21 



255 



WEEKLY EETURNS OF DEATHS PROM CERTAIN INFECTIOUS 

DISEASES. 



Deaths from Infectious Diseases not specifically mentioned in 
above Tables during the Weeks of Dec. 4, 11, 18 and 25, 1909. 





Place. 


Week ending — 


DISEASE. 


Dec. 4. Dec. 11. 


Dec. 18. 


Dec. 25. 


Cerebro-spinal meningitis, 


Boston, 

Northampton, . 
Somerville, 
Worcester, 


1 
1 
2 


- 


1 : 
1 


Scarlet fever, . . . . 


Boston, 
Brockton, . 
Lynn, 
Maiden, 
Springfield, 
Taunton, . 


- 


1 
1 
1 


- 


1 

1 
2 


Whooping cough, 


Boston, 
Holyoke, . 
Lawrence, . 
Worcester, 


1 


1 
1 


2 


1 
1 




Boston, 
Cambridge, 
Fall River, 
Holyoke, . 
New Bedford, . 
Northampton, . 
Worcester, 


2 
1 
1 
1 
1 


1 

1 

1 


1 


2 



Tuberculosis other than pul- 


Beverly, 






1 








monary. 


Boston, 






5 


1 


3 


2 




Cambridge 






- 


- 


- 


2 




Chicopee, 






1 


- 


- 


- 




Clinton, 






- 


1 


- 


- 




Gardner, 






1 


_ 


_ 


_ 




Holyoke, 






- 


- 


2 


- 




Hyde Park 






1 


- 


- 


- 




Lawrence, 






- 


1 


3 


_ 




Lowell, 






_ 


- 


1 


- 




New Bedford, 




- 


1 


1 


1 




Quincy, 


- 


1 


- 


1 


Influenza, 


Boston, 








5 




Cambridge, 






- 


1 




Springfield, 






- 


1 



256 



WEEKLY RETURNS OF CASES OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES. 



Cases of Infectious Diseases reported during the Weeks of 
Dec. 4, 11, 18 and 25, 1909. 

[Under the provisions of section 52 of chapter To of the Revised Laws.] 



Wbbk ending — 



Dec. 25. 



Diphtheria, 

Measles, 

Scarlet fever, 

Typhoid fever, .... 
Tuberculosis, pulmonary, . 
Cerebro-spinal meningitis, . 
Whooping cough, .... 

Varicella, 

Mumps, 

Ophthalmia neonatorum, 
Tuberculosis other than pulmonary, 

Smallpox 

Tetanus, 

Trichinosis, 

Trachoma 

Anterior poliomyelitis, 
Leprosy, 



220 

202 

140 

52 

113 

1 

13 

65 

3 

1 

1 



202 

209 

143 

54 

157 

1 

30 

84 

1 

1 



191 
284 
158 
45 
148 

17 

56 

3 

1 
1 

1 

1 



201 
193 
168 
35 
123 

14 

57 

1 

1 



MONTHLY REPORT ON INSPECTION OF FOOD AND DRUGS. 



The following summary presents the results of the examination of food 
and drugs made by the State Board of Health during the month of 
December, 1909: — 





















Number 


adulterated 






Number 


adulterated 




Articles examined. 


found 
to be of 


or varying 


Total. 


Articles examined. 


to be of 


or varying 


Total. 




Good 
Quality. 


Legal 
Standard. 






Good 
Quality. 


Legal 
Standard. 




Butter, . 


16 


2 


18 


Maple syrup, 


2 


_ 


2 


Canned vege- 
tables, 


1 




1 


Meat products: — 








Cheese, . 


1 


_ 


1 


Canned meat, . 


3 


- 


3 


Cider, . 


1 


2 


3 


Hamburg steak, 


5 


4 


9 


Cocoa, . 


5 


- 


5 


Head cheese, 


1 


- 


1 


Coffee, . 


4 


- 


4 


Mince meat, 


6 


- 


6 


Condensed milk, . 


3 


- 


3 


Sausages, . 


11 


2 


13 


Confectionery, 


1 


-• 


1 


Tripe, 


1 


- 


1 


Cream, . 


12 


1 


13 


Milk, . 


413 


59 


472 


Cream of tartar, . 


1 


- 


1 


1 Olive oil, 


11 


2 


13 


Dried fruits, 


8 


1 


9 


Pastry, . 


4 


- 


4 


Drugs, . 


51 


12 


63 


Shrimp, 


1 


- 


1 


F 1 a v or i n g ex- 








Spices, . 


11 


- 


11 


tracts, 


5 


- 


5 


Table sauce, 




1 


1 


Honey, . 


1 


- 


1 


Wine, . 


3 


2 


5 


.lams and jollies, 


3 


1 


4 
















Lard, 


9 


1 


10 


Total, . 


594 


90 


684 



257 



The samples of drugs found to be adulterated were: alcohol, spirit 
of camphor and spirit of peppermint. 

The cities and towns in which samples were collected were: Atliol, 
Amesbury, Beverly, Boston, Brookline, Brockton, Bniintree, Cambridge, 
Charlton, Dedham, Fall Biver, Fitchburg, Gardner, (Jranby, Lawrence, 
Lexington, Longmeadow, Lynn, Maiden, Natick, Newburyport, New 
Bedford, Newton, North Andover, Norwood, Pittsfield, Quincy, Salem, 
Somerville, Svvampscott, Taunton, Waltham, "Warren, Webster, West 
Springfield, Woburn, Worcester. 



PROSECUTIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OP THE LAW RELATING 
TO POOD AND DRUGS. 



Fifteen convictions were secured during the month of December, 1909, 



for selling adulterated food and drugs, as follows 



No. 


Name of Defendant. 


Place. 


Character of Article sold. 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 


John Cavanaugh, . 
Gustav Yunggebauer, . 
Mary Burns, . 
Henry H. Chamberlain, 
Willard Dean, 
Edward J. Fuller, 
William T. Hardy, 
William T. Hardy, 
Gustav A. Peterson, 
Gustav A. Peterson, 
David A. Robinson, 
David A, Robinson, 
Joseph Teot, 
Howard McKee, . 
Howard McKee, . 




Lawrence, 

Lawrence, 

Saugus, 

West wood, 

Norwood, 

Sharon, . 

Lexington, 

Lexington, 

Lexington, 

Lexington, 

Fitchburg, 

Fitchburg, 

Pittsfield, 

Fall River, 

Fall River, 




Hamburg steak. 
Hamburg steak. 
Milk (total solids, 11.79). 1 
Milk (total solids, 11.00) .= 
Milk (total solids, 10.84). 
Milk (total solids, 10.46). 3 
Milk (total solids, 10.58) .»,« 
Milk (total solids, 10.58). 
Milk (total solids, 9.33). 
Milk (total solids, 8.98). 
Milk (total solids, 11.86).' 
Milk (total solids, 11.64). 3 
Milk (total solids, 11.38).* 
Milk (total solids, 11. OS). 2 
Milk (total solids, 11.08). 



i Appealed. 

Fines imposed, $460. 



Watered. 



s Skimmed. 



258 



M 
M 
pq 

o 

H 
P 

o 

6 

H 

03 

P 

o 
o 

p 
eh 

« 

Eh 
P 

t> 
P 

4 
o 

EQ 





>> 


Pi 

o 














































































Pi 




CD CD CD 




CD 




CD 


c> 




- 




-_ 


CD 




o 


. S • 

cd >— i ■ 


O CD CD 




CD 




O 


CD 




CD 




S 


CD 




P 


^ f H 




U 




hi 


>-■ 




hi 




h. 

CD 
P 






s 


9 • c 


CD <D ® 

a d- p- 




CD 

Pi 




CD 




P 




c. 




CD 
P 




H 


S r; tc 

goo 


s ^- 'O 
?l g <N 




o 




8 


5. 




8 




■o 

1— 


<5J 




O 


W Ci M _ 




CO 




tji' 


^ 




CO 




CO 


oi 




>e 


— . CD => 






es 




09 


«9 








09 






<s 


0(S N 
























s~. 


e 

co 


"g O CD • ^ 


— 




.. 




.- 


.. 




T 




•- 


«^ 


« 


a 


O N^.^: 6£ 




















*J 




s 


o 


^ fl . ^ G 


- *" a 




p 


















HO. 


*^ 


rt CD « Mjj 


S £ ® 




CD 




CD 







CO 




s 


a 


o 
a 


o 
o 

a 


.,o c a u 

« CD g .Ph 


£ * CD* cl 

Pfc pfe & 


C 

o 

cS 


a 

h 
CD 

P 


1-^ 

- 

ci 
6! 


CD . 

hi ei 
CD ^ 

Pi CO 

O T3 


CD 

hi 
CO 

P 


09 

is 


CD 

hi 
CD 

P 


B 


CD 

u 
CD 

P 


. CD • 

hi Q hi 

CD V CO 
fe P& 


« 


O 


(-1 U PJu . 


3-aacaS 


>o 


IH 


~ 


'- 


TJ 


'X 

CI 


n 


o 


■a OS'S 




u* 




•^ CD c; CD • 


CO 




CD 






CD 









_ ~ - . 




CO 


—• T3 ■ T3 <-< 






■Cf'« 




■sec 


d 


TD -ro 




P. 


T3 °° T3 ** 


'C 


rH 


-c 


*^ n3 




TJ 




■a 


H 


-a 05 -a 




O 

en 


no^ .a 


• 03 - eS . 

CO CO CO 


99 

t3 


2 


09 

•a 


■^ 

T3 tS 


| 


09 


OS 


o9 
■a 


CO 


CO 

ra-c-o 




n-j-a'CT 


o .5 "o .5 "o 


O 




9 


.a co 
o.E 




09 




c 




CD— © 




cd a 


<D f'S CD . 

a p ,2 « H 




o 




"c 




o 




O 


5*3 5 




B — 


oo c3 w cS w 




■/. 


09 


en - 


00 


o9 


DO 


CC 


DO 


C3 « S3 




"3 % 


°3 '3 >i >h Pi 


S§3§3 


a 




_ 


g 


3i 


^_ 




,_ 




! 


"£ — ti 




a si 


+3 -W A CD 

s a !s p.' -1 


GO 





09 


5 


^ 


5 


J^ 


55 5 




O "~ 


OO'i'.J 


O CD O W o 


a 


o 


CD 


O CD 


o 


CD 








c 


CD o « 




a 


OO Sec 


H H H 




H 




H 


H 




EH 




:- 


H 






• fe • • 
































' 


















CD 




























.fc 




























't3 




























a 




























<S 
























»i 




o 
























a 




CD 
























3 




DQ 
























•a 




























o 




• "3 • • 
























Bu 




a 

c3 




























hi 
























o 

h 


fcH 


fa r - 

• CO • 

m bo u ® 

Ph _ ,;!8 a 


EO 








03 
CO 

cS 














o 
i-T 

O 

s 


u 
o 

CD 


CO 

C3 

a" 
o 

&C 

_a 

"H 








CD 
CD 
hi 

a 

hi 
PQ 












CO 
00 

hT 

CD 


c 
S 
o 
<v 

a 

S3 


N 
N 

B. 

cS 

a 

hi 

CD 

m 


a 
o 

CO 

hi 

CD 

CD 
PW 








.a* 

CO 

a 
,a 
hi 
o 
fa 












CO 

rd 
CD 

cd" 
o 
'S 






PJ4 03 


> 




















o 
O 




P4 


O CO [X . -i-i 

£5 ££ 


c3 

a 
C5 








CD 
< 














'a 












■ 
















a 

c4 




























t> 


c a .s.a 
























c 

a 

03 


o 

3 


.SJ S3 

rrj CD <B I 1 




















































O 


CO 
























V 


• „ 


'0 p,p, 




















































o- 


>, M u- ■*- 
























n 


M« ft OO 
























S3 


CD b! 

o 


. 7 O +^> +^ 


























■*-, "ETC 

PhPh K2M3 






















M 
S 


h oj 
•S*.a 


M 


&3 ^ CO CO 

co$5 33 


P3P3 




C3P5CHPitf 

l-H CO >0 t- ~ 










M CO 

33 C*. 


S 5 


Ci 


»C ~- ^ Tjl 


C-. rH 




oo x co » cc 










r. 35 


£ <» 


O 


o o 


O iH 




occcc 










r o 




co 


CIH CT 1 C 


CN CO 




CO CO CO CO CO 








i-l rH 



250 



ace 



p, p< 



© © © © 



cent. ; 
r. 

cent. ; 
r. 

cent. ; 
r. 

cent. 
r. 

cent. ; 
r. 

cent. ; 
r. 

cent. ; 
ilk. 


2.10 per 
ded wate 
1.55 per 
ded wate 
2.38 per 
ded wate 
0.60 per 
ded wate 
0.48 per 
ded wate 
0.30 per 
ded wate 
0.58 per 
immed n 


i-l'd'^'T3 r " lr O'"" l '0 , """O r ""0" ,, ,M 


c3 - etf _e3 .. cj - cS -<S . m 


Cfi*~ . m _* GO _, W«* OT rrH ^^W 0. _, 






uae3«cia)e«<»eS ai o3'»e«'»e8 




3 §3 §3 §3 §3 §3 §3 § 


o«o«o°o u o«o«o« 


En H H H H H H 



.2 fe 



<8 £ « 



<5 h3 



^ ■=. ~ % 

I I 1 I 

rH 03 

t- oo m ^ 

O 03 i-H t— 

C5 o> rti m 

o o _ i-l 

rH iH 57 CO 



£ :3 

S £ 

ram in 

tc co o 

1H i-H o 

CO CO CO 



260 



INSPECTION OF DAIRIES. 



During the month of December, 1909, 255 dairies supplying milk 
for public sale in Massachusetts were examined, of which 56 are situated 
in New York. The Massachusetts dairies yielded the following data : — 







Number found 




Number 




Plack. 


Number 
examined. 


to present 

no Objectionable 

Features. 


Per Cent. 


concerning 

which Letters 

were sent. 


Per Cent. 


Berlin, 


3 


1 


33.33 


2 


66.67 


Second inspection, 




24 


18 


75.00 


6 


25.00 


Third inspection, 




2 


2 


100.00 


- 


- 


Boylston, 




- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


Second inspection, 




1 


- 


- 


1 


100.00 


Millis, . 




12 


5 


41 67 


7 


58.33 


Second inspection, 




17 


9 


52.94 


8 


47 06 


Northborough, 




4 


4 


100.00 


- 


- 


Second inspection, 




45 


35 


77.78 


10 


22.22 


Sterling, . 




9 


3 


33 33 


6 


66 67 


Second inspection, 




81 


27 


33.33 


54 


66.67 


Third inspection, 




1 


1 


100.00 


- 


- 



Total number of dairies examined (including those in New York), . . . 255 

Number found to be free from objectionable conditions, 137 

Number concerning which letters were sent, 118 

Total number of conditions to which attention was called, 363 

Percentage of dairies which passed inspection, 53.73 

In addition to the above, 107 dairies were visited at which the sale 
of milk had been discontinued. 

The names of the owners of the dairies in Massachusetts found to be 
worthy of commendation follow : — 



Ayers, W. H.*t 
Barnes, George H.* 
Berry, T. C* 
Brewer, L. W.*t 
Bruce, Willard G.* 
Carter, L. D* 
Elms, J. S.* 



Adams, Moses * 
Brushok, Otto * 
Cassidy, T. 
Clark, Stanley * 
Hubbard, E. 



Berlin. 

Harper, H. H.*t 
Hastings, Arthur*! 
Kendall, L. P.* 
Marble, "W. F.» 
Naugher, Edward *t 
Paradis, L. W* 
Porter, S. E.*t 

Millis. 

Keefe, Patrick * 
Post, B. F * 
Richardson, C. F.* 
Richardson, E. L. 
Rotman, H. 



Rogers, Mary O.* 
Sawyer, C. M.J 
Sawyer, H. J. 
Sawyer, J. H.* 

Severance, N. N.J 
Spofford, C. E.*t 
James D. Tyler.*t 



Simond, Louis * 
Slayton, J. C* 
Smith, Edward 
Thome Bros.* 



* Second inspection. 



t Reported favorably on first inspection. 



t Third inspection. 



2(51 



Allen, John * 
Allen, Walter 0.*t 
Balcom, Norman*t 
Bemis, E. H.* 
Blair, F. H.*t 
Blakely, Daniel 
Blakely, Henry * 
Brigham, W. O.* 
Buckley, Clarence * 
Burdette, C. H * 
Carey, Frank 
Carlson, S. H * 
Chapdelaine, Oliver *t 



Nortliborough. 

Collins, Hiram * 
Davis, C. A.* 
Duplisse, W. H.* 
Fawcett, Dana W.*t 
Flibert, Thomas * 
Franklin, Frederick * 
Hildreth, Chester E.* 
Johnson, Carl 
Kimball, C * 
Lanois, Adam * 
Lawrence, C. A.* 
Mayo, C. E.*t 
Norcross, E. W.* 



Richardson, Theo. P.* 
Russell, Walker * 
Sampson, W. H* 
Shaw & Duval 
Smith, Chester A.* 
Sparrow, L. A.* 
Stone, Walter* 
Valentine, E. C.*t 
Warren, George A.* 
Whitcomb, Levi * 
Wilcox, E. P.* 
Wilson, Mrs. Lucy J.*t 
Woodward, T. C.*t 



Bacon, Henry ± 
Boutwell, E. E * 
Burpee, J. S.*t 
Buttrick, George F.* 
Buttrick, Mrs. Mary A.* 
Buttrick, Miss Mary E.*t 
Corkum, D. W.* 
Dee, John* 
Flagg, George*t 
Gleason, Walter D.* 
Hawkins, Thomas* 



Sterling. 

Heywood, E. K.* 
Kendall, George E.* 
Kendall, Luther B.*t 
Lawrence, J. 0.*t 
Lawton, J. W. 
Magee, Ralph E.* 
Mosher, A. J.* 
Newhall, A. W * 
Pratt, J. F.*t 
Rice, W. F * 

New York Dairies. 



Sanders, S. S* 
Stevens, R. R. 
Stockwell, C. L* 
Stuart, George F.*t 
Trask, F. R * 
Walker, W. S.*t 
Wilcox, F. C. N.*t 
Wilder, A. W.*t 
Wilder, Harry M.* 
Wood, C. A. 



Number 
examined. 



Number found 

to present 

no Objectionable 

Features. 



Number 

concerning 

which Letters 

were sent. 



Buskirks, 

Second inspection, 
Cambridge, . 

Second inspection, 
Eagle Bridge, 

Second inspection, 
Hoosick, 

Second inspection, 
Petersburg, . 

Second inspection, 
Schaghticoke, 

Second inspection, 



14 

13 

16 

4 

2 

7 



64.29 
69.23 
56.25 
25.00 
100.00 
28.57 



35.71 
30.77 
43.75 
75.00 

71.43 



Total number of New York dairies examined, 56 

Number found to be free from objectionable conditions, 32 

Number concerning which letters were sent, 24 

Total number of conditions to which attention was called, 68 

Percentage of dairies which passed inspection, 57.14 



* Second inspection. f Reported favorably on first inspection. \ Third inspection. 



262 



INVESTIGATION OF TYPHOID FEVER AT MAYNARD, MASS. 



In September, 1905, X, a farmer of Maynard, after having been in 
poor health all summer, and after a two weeks' trip to Maine, was taken 
sick with typhoid fever. The fever ran for twenty-one days; then he 
had a relapse, and in all he was in bed eight weeks. In January, 
1906, Mrs. X became ill. She ran no fever and did not think she had 
typhoid. She was in bed but one week, and considered herself merely 
nervously tired. Since his sickness X has been in unusually good health. 
He has had no jaundice and no abdominal pain. 

In 1906 X began to keep two cows, and since that time cases of 
typhoid fever have occurred among his milk customers as follows : — 

No. of Cases. 

September, 1906, 1 

April, 1907, 2 (possibly 3) 

May, 1907 1 

June, 1908 1 

September, 1908 2 (possible cases said to be customers of X) 

March, 1909 1 

August, 1909 1 

September, 1909 2 

Total, 9 (or possibly 12 cases) 

/ 

This number of cases is larger than the total number reported by the 
Maynard board of health for the whole town during this period. 

These cases of typhoid fever have been confined to a residence portion 
of the town about half a mile square, centering about X's house. The 
region is in the better portion of the town, well elevated, with good 
hygienic conditions, and not close to the mills or the river. 

The people are seemingly of moderate means, not foreign born, and 
of good intelligence. The houses have separate cesspools. There is no 
town sewer. The water supply is the same all through the town. The 
ice for the whole town comes from the same source — the river. 

There is a well in the neighborhood used by a large number of people. 
Several of the typhoid cases did not use this well, and many other 
uninfected persons did get some of their drinking water there. X did 
not use this well. 

The hygienic condition of X's place is quite unsuited for the produc- 
tion of milk. The cesspool is not carefully sealed. The barn is filthy 
ni nl fly infested. An unguarded privy drains into the cellar, where the 

1 Disease due to milk contamination by a chronic carrier (urine). 



263 

manure and a pig arc kept. Complaints have been made by the neighbors 
of the smell from the place. 

X has kept two cows, which have yielded him about two 8V2 quart 
cans daily. He milks the cows and strains the milk himself. Mrs. X 
washes the cans. The milk is peddled about the neighborhood by 
X soon after it is milked. It is not iced. 

No definite conclusions as to the source of the typhoid cases have 
been drawn. The time that has elapsed since many of the cases occurred 
has made the obtaining of accurate information difficult. The possibility 
that X is a carrier has been considered. If he is a carrier it is more 
than probable that he has infected the milk. The prompt distribution 
of the milk may account for the small number of cases that have occurred 
at any one time. 

Specimens of urine and stool have been obtained for examination. 

Date of the investigation, Sept. 39, 1909. 

Subsequent Notes. 

Shortly after the above date specimens of feces and urine were ob- 
tained from X. Bacteriological examination of this material showed 
no typhoid bacilli in the feces, but there was an abundant growth of 
motile bacilli in the urine. The bacilli corresponded in cultural and 
agglutination characters to typhoid bacilli. A second examination of 
the man's urine and feces was made. The same condition was again 
found. 

X was informed of his condition and forbidden to distribute any more 
milk. The board of health of Maynard was notified. 

On November 4 X was given urotropin, with a dosage of 10 grains, 
t. i. d. At the end of about ten days a specimen of urine was examined, 
and showed apparently a marked decrease in the number of typhoid 
bacilli. Owing to complaints of discomfort, the urotropin was then dis- 
continued for a few days. Examination of the urine at the end of this 
period showed a marked increase in the number of bacilli. Urotropin 
was then resumed, but with a dosage of 5 grains, t. i. d. Ten days 
later, December 3, a specimen of urine showed an apparent decrease in 
the bacteriological content. December 13 the urine showed a moderate 
number of bacilli. 

On December 15 the patient was directed to discontinue the use of 
urotropin and take copper sulphate in one-quarter-grain capsules t. i. d. 
After two weeks' trial of this medication urinary examination showed no 
improvement in the condition. 

At the beginning of the year 1910, four and a half years after his- 



264 

typhoid fever attack, in spite of treatment with urotropin and copper 
sulphate, this man shows a constant typhoid bacilluria. He has no 
symptoms of cystitis, and feels better than he did before being sick. 

ANIMAL DISEASES TRANSMISSIBLE TO MAN. • 



By Theobald Smith, M.D., LL.D., George Fabyan Professor of Comparative Pa- 
thology in the Medical School of Harvard University and Pathologist of the 
Massachusetts State Board of Health. 



Introductory. 

The points of contact between human and animal life on the globe 
are numerous, complex, and of great importance to mankind. In the 
earliest stages of man's development he was little more than one of the 
higher animals himself. Through his growth in intelligence he has 
gradually segregated himself, and gained mastery over a portion of 
animal life; he subjugated and domesticated certain species, and others 
he destroyed. 

There remains still the larger portion of animal life quite uncon- 
trolled by man. Through persistent efforts, which have been and are 
still being made, to subjugate and to destroy it, we have learned that 
this is no easy task. In fact its difficulty seems to be in inverse pro- 
portion to the size of the animals to be dealt with. Though the larger 
mammals and birds are either under control or in process of extermina- 
tion, the smaller species, like rats and mice, flourish in our midst. 
Descending to the invertebrates, we learn to our dismay that insects 
are almost beyond control, and that they possess much of the tenacity 
of veritable micro-organisms of disease. Human skill and resourceful- 
ness have been heavily taxed to make even an impression on our insect 
pests. 

Among animals we have thus, on the one hand, a small group of 
friends, or at least slaves and helpers, representing enormous economic 
wealth at the present time, and, on the other, a large group of destructive 
enemies, or, at best, to us, useless messmates. A closer scrutiny of this 
relationship between human and animal life shows that animals may 
injure us in two ways. They may threaten our food supply and they 
may transmit to us certain of their diseases. Among the higher animals 
the danger from any attack on our food supply is slight. Insect life 

1 Illustrated lecture delivered April, 1908, in a public course on sanitary science, in the medical 
department of Columbia University, New York City. 



265 

is, on the other hand, a real danger, and the annual losses from inc 
depredations are very great. The higher animals, which have survived 
man's conquest, and which have become his burden bearers, his son. 
of food and clothing and his daily associates, are subject to certain 
infectious diseases which may be transmitted to man. Among insects 
and certain of their near relatives there occur species which during the 
past twenty years have been placed in a new light, in that certain dis- 
coveries have shown them to be capable of carrying infection from man 
to man, or even from animals to man. These insects, ignored until 
recently, have been found to play a most important role, especially in 
tropical and subtropical countries. They practically control, through 
their disease-bearing proclivities, the fate of mankind in tropical 
countries. 

Our subject, therefore, divides itself naturally into two quite dis- 
tinct parts. In the first place we are to consider the diseases trans- 
missible from the valuable domesticated animals to us. The important 
problem which here confronts us is how to deal with these diseases 
without injuring or destroying the usefulness of the animals. The 
second problem concerns the insects, which are presumably of no use 
to us. Their biological characters are, however, such as to make their 
annihilation a very difficult problem. 

Higher Animals as Soueces of Disease. 

Turning now to the first group of animals, those which we denominate 
the higher animals, I shall not go astray in once more emphasizing 
their value to the human race. It is in fact difficult to grasp the 
economic and sanitary importance of these species. If we take away 
from our daily diet certain animal foods, such as meat, milk, butter 
and eggs, there seems to be little left. At any rate it would take time 
for most of us to adjust ourselves to a diet from which these four 
articles are left out. If from our clothing we eliminate articles made 
of wool, hides and fur, a wide gap is opened, not easily filled with 
substitutes. We should not forget the labors of the horse and the ox 
in summing up the economic resources of animal life. In agricultural 
life man's association with animals is quite intimate. Even in the 
city we associate voluntarily and intimately with dogs, cats, parrots and 
singing birds, and they are to us an inexhaustible fund of pleasure. 
"We associate involuntarily with rats and mice, for these pests penetrate 
into our homes and attack our foods. 

Each species among the higher animals is beset like ourselves by a 
number of infectious diseases, which are usually limited to the species 



266 

and are its exclusive property, so to speak. Only a few pass to other 
species, and the interest felt in the integrity of these animals has led 
to the development of a special department of medical education, known 
as veterinary medicine, whose function it is to study these diseases 
and find ways and means for their eradication. 

Of the relatively few diseases which may be transmitted to man, 
public health and sanitary science must take cognizance. They have 
created a difficult situation ; for, as stated above, we must balance between 
the usefulness of an animal and its relative danger, between the com- 
mercial value of its hide, flesh, hair and milk, and their incidental 
danger to human health and life. 

I shall now very briefly discuss the most important animal diseases 
transmissible to man, and in so doing group them, (1) as contact or 
inoculation diseases and (2) as food infections. Among the former are 
such diseases as anthrax, bubonic plague, glanders, rabies, psittacosis 
and certain skin diseases of mice and cats. Among the latter are 
tuberculosis, foot-and-mouth disease, Malta fever, meat-poisoning, botul- 
ism and trichinosis. The classification is somewhat arbitrary and not 
wholly correct, for some diseases belong to both groups. Thus, while 
animal tuberculosis is chiefly transmitted in milk, it may also be in- 
oculated into wounds of the hands, as happens occasionally in the butcher 
trade. 

Anthrax is among the best known and most widely disseminated dis- 
eases of the first group. It affects sheep, horses and cattle. The bacillus 
which causes it is of interest from its historical relation to the study 
of micro-organisms. It was one of the first seen in the blood with the 
microscope, about fifty years ago, and soon after proved to be the cause 
of this fatal disease. It was studied by our two greatest bacteriologists, 
Pasteur and Koch, and both gained celebrity from their achievements 
with this microbe. 

This bacillus is veiw resistant to destruction, and this vitality is due 
to its capacity for forming spores. The rod-shaped organism produces 
within itself an oval body. The rod disintegrates; but the oval body, 
or spore, maintains its vitality under certain conditions for years. Bac- 
teriologists have frequently tested the prolonged life of such spores. 
In 1902 I put small threads with spores attached into an ordinary 
cotton-plugged bottle, and placed the bottle in a closet in the laboratory. 
Six years later I removed some of the threads and placed them in a 
suitable culture medium. "Within twenty-four hours the spores had 
Miated and given rise to an abundant progeny of bacilli. 

The disease is usually contracted by animals on pastures, when the} r 



267 

eat the spores on the grass. It may also be inoculated by flies. It is 
highly fatal. The bacilli multiply rapidly, and after the death of the 
animal they form spores in the blood and other fluids which escape 
from the body. These spores thus reinfect the pasture, and become 
attached to the hides, wool, hair and flesh. Transported to distant 
countries in these products, they are still capable of producing disease. 
Men who handle hides may become inoculated on the face, neck and 
hands. Those who handle horsehair and wool imported from anthrax- 
infected countries may become infected by inhaling dust from these raw 
materials in factories, and die of the' so-called wool-sorter's disease. 

The environment of such factories may become permanently infected 
if the climate and soil are favorable. The factory wastes containing 
the spores are washed down in streams, and eventually the pastures 
bordering such streams become the source of fatal diseases. Such plague 
spots are known to exist in our country as a result of importation, and 
it is simply a matter of time to what extent this disease will permanently 
lodge on our pastures, unless public health officials are given the author- 
ity to exercise a firm pressure upon industries which are in position to 
mortgage our soil forever to disease. Much work has been done by 
governmental agencies to discover processes which will disinfect hides 
and hair without injuring or even destroying the commercial value of 
these raw materials. 

A method of vaccinating live stock pasturing on permanently infected 
land was devised by Pasteur. It constitutes one of his most brilliant 
achievements in a period of almost universal ignorance and skepticism 
concerning the possibility of vaccination. Industrial hygiene has also 
contributed its share in the prevention of anthrax by its steady warfare 
upon dust, and by its demand for machinery which will carry off such 
dust from the workrooms of operatives in factories. I have dwelt at 
some length upon anthrax and its bacillus because it illustrates the 
relation existing between the biology of a microbe and its industrial 
and agricultural relationships. Were it not for the spore, anthrax 
would hardly be of much consequence. The great vitality of the spore 
causes the slow extension of infected territory and the contamination of 
valuable raw materials. It has brought into action against the disease 
itself the forces of industrial hygiene and the resources of bacteriology 
in the use of vaccines, disinfectants and curative serums. 

Glanders is a bacterial disease of the horse and his immediate rela- 
tives, the ass and mule. Other domestic animals, such as cats, are 
occasionally infected from the horse ; but in general it is true that 
glanders is peculiar to the horse. From the horse it is occasionally 



268 

transmitted to man. It has many of the characters of tuberculosis and 
is to the horse what tuberculosis is to man. It is usually a chronic 
ailment, often hidden or latent, rarely acute. The most prominent 
symptom is a discharge from one or both nostrils. It is this discharge 
which contains glanders bacilli and which constitutes the chief danger 
to man. Sometimes the disease attacks the skin of the horse and it 
is then called farcy. Abscesses form and discharge their contents out- 
wards, soiling the skin and scattering the bacilli. Unlike anthrax, 
glanders does not work at a distance or through animal products, be- 
cause the bacillus does not form spores and its vitality is limited. A 
period of four to six weeks represents the maximum duration of life 
outside of the body. The average duration is probably much less than 
this. The danger to man consists in handling the animal alive or soon 
after death. A wound on the hands or other exposed parts of the body 
forms the portal of entry for the bacillus from the horse. In man the 
disease is frequently fatal, or, if not fatal, it lasts a long time. 

Fortunately for us, glanders bacilli do not always infect human beings 
exposed to them, otherwise there would be many more cases than are now 
reported. Thus in Massachusetts alone there were killed in 1908 over 
900 horses and mules visibly affected with glanders. Every one of these 
cases must have exposed perhaps one attendant to the disease; yet the 
cases in man are relatively rare. Probably certain favoring conditions 
must be at hand before the glanders bacillus can multiply in wounds 
and set up disease. The dangerous character of the bacilli cannot be 
minimized however. During the past fifteen years three distinguished 
scientists have lost their lives from laboratory infection. 

Active measures against the disease in horses are in operation in all 
civilized countries. In Massachusetts animals openly diseased are seized 
and killed. Unfortunately there are many infected animals which are 
not openly diseased, and which are not discharging the bacilli. These 
may become openly diseased later on or they may recover. Sometimes 
very valuable animals respond positively to the test for glanders; but 
the skilled veterinarian is unable to find any disease even after very 
careful examination. AVhat to do with such cases constitutes a serious 
problem in public health administration. 

Rabies is an infectious disease of dogs, wolves and allied species, 
which is transmitted by the bite of the rabid animal to a large number 
of other species, including man. The rabic virus has no predilection 
for any small group of species, but appears to find a suitable soil in all 
mammals. Being quite perishable, the virus discharged in the saliva 
of the rabid animal does not survive in nature. The living affected 



269 

animal is therefore the only object which needs consideration from a 
public health standpoint. It is both the producer and distributor. 

Much has been written in recent years concerning the symptoms of 
the disease in dogs, and. its fatal termination in man when the symptoms 
have begun to appear. We may turn from these to consider certain 
general precautions which all dog owners should observe for the good 
of the 'community. 

The variable period of incubation makes it a difficult disease to 
stamp out. It may vary from three weeks to many months. Dogs 
bitten by rabid animals are usually quarantined for ninety days. The 
carelessness and indifference of the public has permitted a wave of 
rabies, which has counted, not only thousands of victims among dogs, 
but also many cases in man, to sweep over our country. What the 
situation would have been without the Pasteur treatment we may con- 
sider ourselves fortunate not to know. The difficulties of suppressing 
this disease are greatly increased by the tendency of rabid dogs to run 
long distances and inoculate fresh dogs over a wide territory. They 
cross State and national boundaries, and the care and vigilance exer- 
cised in one community are nullified by the negligence of adjoining 
ones. England, which enjoys the great privileges of an island isolation, 
has been able to stamp out rabies completely, and does not need Pasteur 
institutes. All imported dogs are quarantined for a certain period 
before they are set free. Perhaps the chief obstacle to the eradication 
of this dread disease is a certain soft-heartedness of civilized people, 
which interferes with the application of such simple measures as the 
destruction of vagrant dogs and the muzzling of all running at large. 
This soft-heartedness, exercised in so many directions, unless held in 
check and duly controlled, may in time lead to the physical Tuin of 
civilized races. 

As long as rabies threatens us and our helpless children on the streets, 
the Pasteur treatment will remain a great boon. It is based on the 
simple principle that the hodj, artificially and hurriedly immunized after 
the bite, becomes capable of coping with the virus when, after the slow 
movement of the latter along the nerves from the wound, it finally 
reaches the spinal cord and medulla. The vaccine used is the dried 
cord of a rabbit which has been inoculated with a virus greatly modified 
by numerous passages through the rabbit, and thereby made harmless 
to man. It is obvious from the nature of the treatment that there 
should be no delay in applying it. Meanwhile, all should co-operate 
in ridding our country of this disease, and I have no doubt that we 
shall receive hearty assistance from our northern and southern neighbors, 
for such a campaign must of necessity become wide as the continent. 



270 

The bubonic plague represents among man a class of nearly extinct 
diseases which are still common among the higher animals. These 
diseases are called septicaemias or blood diseases, and are rapidly and 
highly fatal. Occasionally surgeon- and others die very quickly after 
receiving some small wound during operations upon infected organs. 
It is conceivable that such virus, if the machinery for its transmission 
were at hand, might produce another Black Death. Fortunately the 
virus dies with the victim. The habits of civilized life stand in the 
way of its perpetuation. The bubonic plague is practically a wound 
infection; for the painstaking researches of bacteriologists have clearly 
shown that the virus is transmitted from rat to rat chiefly through the 
wounds inflicted by fleas, and that man is infected in a similar manner. 
My reason for touching upon the plague here is that it is really a 
disease of certain lower animals, and that it is perpetuated by them. 
"Wherever the disease has been studied, the rat, with the assistance of 
the flea, has been found to be the carrier and disseminator. In Central 
Asia a species of woodchuck maintains the infection. In California 
not only rats but also ground squirrels appear to be taking on them- 
selves the role of perpetuators and disseminators. The only remedy 
seems to be the destruction of these animals wherever they tend to 
come in contact with man. It is in this direction that the warfare 
against the bubonic plague has been waged hitherto. If this scourge 
should escape from its present narrow territory and spread over the 
country, its eradication would become a hopeless task. The burden of 
modern life would be increased by the weight of another infectious 
disease to be fought. 

Foot-and-mouth disease, which occurs among cattle, sheep and swine, 
interests us here because it is occasionally transmitted to man in dairy 
products. It may be classed as an eruptive disease, for it is characterized 
by the presence of vesicles in the mouth and on the feet. These break 
and leave a denuded surface, which heals rapidly unless other disease 
germs are present which may implant themselves in these ulcers. In 
man the disease shows itself in vesicles around the mouth, and is a 
very mild affection. The objection to this disease is that it occasions 
serious losses in the dairy industry, and the exertions of the national 
government in stamping out the recent localized outbreaks in this 
county are to be commended, for once scattered over the whole country 
the disease probably would never again be completely stamped out. 

Among the infections transmitted by contact or inoculation there 
remain to be mentioned certain skin diseases which children may con- 
tract from diseased mice and cats. These diseases are caused by fungi, 
and the spores produced by them may implant themselves on the skin 



271 

of children and produce affections resembling ringworm. Though cases 
or even epidemics of skin disease thus transmitted are not uncommon 
in European countries., there appears to be as yet little known of such 
occurrences with us. This, I think, is due to the fact that we are still 
s very young civilization, into which many infections have not 
penetrated, or in which they have not yet succeeded in taking root when 
introduced by merchandise or immigrants and their effects. The stock 
of infectious diseases in any one country is like the junk heap or pile 
of refuse in the cellar or yard of an untidy family. Each month or year 
adds new elements to it; but nothing is taken away. Unfortun:.- 
for our posterity we are not sufficiently alive to the great importance 
of prevention. We fail to stamp out the spark, but we make a tre- 
mendous effort when the fire has once started. This is perhaps no more 
than we may expect from average human nature; for a keen sense of 
futurity, of what our present action or inaction may mean to the future, 
is an outgrowth of only the highest types of civilization. 

The diseases which have been discussed are chiefly transmitted by 
inoculation. The virus enters wounds of the skin or mucous membranes. 
The group of infections carried in the food is of equal if not greater 
sanitary significance. Among this latter group tuberculosis has taken 
a rather prominent place before the public in recent years. Like rabies, 
tuberculosis may attack many species of mammals and birds. "Unlike 
rabies, however, the virus of tuberculosis among different species is not 
necessarily identical. We may assume that upon implantation of the 
bacillus in a species different from the one from which the bacillus came 
a gradual change takes place and a new variety becomes established. 
How long a time this change demands, how often or how rarely it takes 
place, how many times the transformation fails to take place, we do not 
know. It is, however, established that three distinct races exist, one 
adapted to man, one to cattle and one to birds, such as domestic :: 
and pigeons. Whether they have actually been derived one from the 
other, and whether they are capable of transformation one into the other, 
are matters of hypothesis and speculation at present which will not detain 
us; for they cannot be utilized as a basis for sanitary measures. 

Among domestic animals, cattle sutler most severely from this plague. 
Xext come swine, which contract it from cattle and probably not from 
each other to any extent. Horses are rarely the victims of tuberculosis. 
Among poultry the disease is evidently increasing. Animals in soologi- 
cal parks, especially monkeys, are not infrequently victims. 

Turning to the sanitary bearings of animal tuberculosis, we may 
accept as demonstrated that in a certain number of cases of the human 
disease the infection comes from cattle and perhaps exclusively from 



272 

the milk. The infection takes place through the digestive tract, and 
produces certain types of tuberculosis affecting the glands in the neck 
and the abdomen. It must not be thought, however, that all such cases 
come from milk. Investigations have shown thus far that from one- 
quarter to one-half of these cases, according to the locality, are of bovine 
origin. On the other hand, the prevalent type of tuberculosis, which 
affects the lungs and which leads to disintegration of lung tissue and 
expectoration of tubercle bacilli, has not yet been proved to be of bovine 
origin. 

The flesh of tuberculous cattle and swine is probably no appreciable 
source of the human disease for several reasons. The bacilli do not, 
as a rule, become disseminated through the blood until in the last stages 
of the disease. Animals in this condition are rejected by meat in- 
spectors. Heat of a relatively low degree destroys tubercle bacilli, and 
even if they should escape the inspector's hands the process of cooking 
would render them harmless. 

With milk the conditions are quite different. It may be consumed 
raw, pasteurized or boiled. If boiled all disease germs are killed. If 
pasteurized in a proper manner, let us say exposed in a closed vessel 
to a temperature of 140° F, for thirty minutes, or to higher tempera- 
tures at proportionately shorter intervals, all disease germs worth con- 
sidering are likewise destroyed. Many physicians have declared them- 
selves as opposed to the use of pasteurized milk for infants, and insist 
on the freedom of raw milk from disease germs. Pasteurization should 
neither be condemned nor accepted unconditionally. It has a valuable 
place in sanitation; but this place must be carefully determined. The 
process of pasteurization should be subjected to the approval of health 
authorities, and only reliable methods authorized. The pasteurized milk 
should be examined bacteriologically, and guarded and controlled just 
as raw milk is. 

The destruction of tubercle bacilli in milk is only a palliative. There 
remains still the source of the difficulty. The complete eradication of 
bovine tuberculosis has been the goal of many sanitarians. To destroy 
all infected cattle has been attempted several times in certain States; 
but the magnitude of the task and its enormous cost have paralyzed the 
attempt. Most conservative sanitarians recommend to-day the organiza- 
tion of dairy inspection on a permanent basis, the removal of all cattle 
with suspicious udders, or in an advanced stage of tuberculosis, at 
regular intervals, say, at least every three months, without compensation, 
ior such animals are in any case unsalable. At the same time owners 
of dairy cattle arc strongly urged to use the tuberculin test, and with 
its aid rid their herds completely of this disease. With rigid dairy 



273 

inspection and the education of the owners by such a procedure, and the 
free application of the tuberculin test by the State under certain speci- 
fied conditions, the time will soon come when the general application 
of the tuberculin test will follow as a matter of course, without entailing 
any serious loss on the individual owner or an intolerable burden on 
the community. 

A disease little known in this country which, however, has played 
an important part in Germany, is trichinosis. Its source is the raw or 
partly cooked flesh of swine. It comes about as follows : in the flesh 
of certain swine may be found microscopic worms known as trichinae. 
The infected swine obtained them by eating other infected animals, such 
as rats and swine. When man eats such meat raw or slightly cooked, 
the worms in the muscles are set free in the stomach. They pass into 
the small intestine, grow into adults, give birth to thousands of young, 
which bore their way through the walls of the intestine and are carried 
by the blood into all parts of the body. During this migration the 
patient may die if he has eaten a large amount of infected flesh. If 
he survives, the young worms come to rest in the muscular tissue, and 
they may remain alive many years without giving the person any serious 
inconvenience. 

What serious dimensions this disease may take when uncontrolled by 
sanitary measures such as cooking, one example will show. In 1865, 
in a small town of 2,000 inhabitants, a trichinous pig was slaughtered, 
the flesh sold and eaten raw by the inhabitants in the form of spiced 
meat. Three hundred and thirty-seven cases of trichinosis occurred and 
101 of these died. The examination of the muscles of human beings 
dissected in medical schools has shown upwards of 5 per cent, infested 
with trichina?. These victims during life probably never knew that they 
had had an attack of trichinosis, because the few parasites consumed 
caused only a mild attack. In this disease prevention is very simple and 
easily applied. Pork should be thoroughly cooked. In Germany an 
extensive meat-inspection service exists, simply for the purpose of elimi- 
nating infected pork. If all pork consumed were eaten well cooked, 
this expensive service would be unnecessary. 

A peculiar fever has been known for years on the Island of Malta, 
occurring among the soldiers of the garrison stationed there, and called 
Malta fever. The soldiers are confined for days, weeks and even months 
when affected with the disease. It is characterized by pains in the 
joints and muscles, great prostration and a long-continued fever, extreme 
emaciation and weakness, and a slow recovery. Death occurs but rarely. 
The micrococcus which was the cause of the disease was discovered in 
1887, and since that time efforts have been made to discover the source 



274 

of this germ. All sorts of vehicles have been suspected as being the 
carriers of the disease into the garrison. It seemed that social position 
offered no protection, for the officers and their families were attacked 
as Avell as the soldiers. Dust, mosquitoes and other possible vehicles 
\v<n: investigated, but these studies did not confirm suspicions. Only 
recently raw goat's milk was found to be the carrier of the micrococcus. 
There were 20,000 goats to supply 200,000 inhabitants with their milk. 
In 1905 there were 643 cases admitted to the hospital; in 1907 there 
were but 7 cases, thus showing the effect of discovering a method of 
preventing the disease. 

In concluding this part of my discourse I will merely mention, as 
a matter of curiosity, an infectious disease of parrots, called psittacosis. 
Attention was first drawn to it in 1892, when a consignment of parrots 
from South America introduced into a number of families in Paris a 
peculiar and fatal form of pneumonia. Of 500 parrots shipped to 
Europe only 200 survived some infectious disease which broke out on 
the way. These survivors carried the infection into the purchasers' 
families. This incident simply suggests watchfulness on our part towards 
domestic pets, and especially towards those recently introduced from 
foreign countries. 

Besides the above-mentioned diseases of animal origin, in which a 
well-recognized micro-organism is the cause, there is a group of affections 
known as meat poisoning, in which certain closely related bacteria figure 
as causes. In all cases the digestive tract is involved. There is diarrhoea 
and vomiting, with fever, and often great prostration. Even death has 
occurred. 

The bacteria are close relatives of the typhoid bacillus and have been 
called paratyphoid bacilli. They originate in sick animals, such as 
cattle and swine, more rarely in horses and sheep, and when the flesh 
of such animals is eaten raw or only partly cooked the bacteria multiply 
in the digestive tract, and their toxins are responsible for the attack. 

Our knowledge of meat poisoning is chiefly of German origin. The 
local origin of the meat supply there leads to epidemics occurring over 
a restricted territory, and the attention of public health authorities is 
at once aroused and the cause located. In our large cities the tracing 
of small epidemics is well-nigh impossible, because the animal yielding 
the meat may have been raised in the far west, slaughtered in the 
middle west and its various parts disseminated over a large eastern city. 

In Germany over 5,000 cases of meat poisoning have been reported 
and studied within the past thirty years. They occurred as epidemics 
involving from 20 to 500 people each. In some the mortality was high. 

It is safe to assume that all severe digestive disturbances, manifested 



275 

by vomiting and purging, in otherwise healthy individuals are ca 
either by food from diseased animals, or else by food, either animal or 
vegetable, which is partly decomposed. Every such attack should call 
the attention of the family to the food, especially its source and the way 
it is kept at home. It may have been kept too long and in inefficient 
refrigerators. The fact tbat the air of a refrigerator feels cold on a 
hot summer day does not prove that the temperature is low enough to 
suppress the multiplication of bacteria. Where there is doubt that the 
food is in good condition it should either be destroyed or thoroughly 
cooked again. Some authorities claim that even well-cooked foods may 
still contain the toxins of the bacteria and cause disturbances. I am 
inclined to believe that this claim has been urged too much, and that, 
unless the food is manifestly spoilt and not merely suspected, a second 
cooking will make it safe. To infants and very young children such food 
should of course not be given. 

Prom what has been said it becomes evident that the application of 
heat in the preparation of food has a sanitary as well as a physiological 
bearing. Cooking has eliminated and continues to eliminate diseases 
which, if allowed to go unchecked would greatly hamper our civilization. 
Cooking is thus a factor of great importance in the prevention of infec- 
tious diseases, and its importance is destined to grow with the density of 
population and the opening up of new channels of infection. Any 
tendency to go back to raw or partly cooked foods should be frowned 
upon by sanitarians, for it may become impossible in the future to 
guarantee the innocuousness of foods now eaten raw or only partly 
sterilized by heat. Only the isolated homestead, where all foods are 
raised for home use, may with impunity be a law unto itself in these 
matters. 

In general it may be stated that at present any one of the diseases 
mentioned adds but little to the death roll due to infectious diseases as 
a whole. This, however, is due to the fact that they are fairly well 
under control, because governments have enacted laws as soon as suffi- 
ciently definite knowledge was at hand upon which to base legislation. 
The past history of every one of these diseases is formidable enough to 
make us realize the danger which society might run if they were ignored 
as dangers to human health and life, and all safeguards removed. That 
these safeguards are not perfect is well known, but it should be remem- 
bered that these diseases constitute a problem the solution of which 
requires thorough knowledge, not only of the disease itself, but of its 
industrial, agricultural and humanitarian relations. There are antago- 
nistic interests to be conciliated and sacrifices to be balanced in every 
effort to improve the public health, for there can be no upward movement 



276 

without sacrifice of some kind. These antagonistic interests are very 
much in evidence in the suppression of animal diseases, because the 
sacrifices to be borne become concrete in the lives of animals whose value 
is measured by the well-known standard of dollars and cents. 

CEREAL IN MEAT PRODUCTS. 



Notice is hereby given that on and after Jan. 1, 1910, it will be 
necessary that the presence of cereal, and its percentage, in meat prod- 
ucts (sausage, veal loaf, etc.) must be indicated upon the labels, in 
accordance with section 19 of chapter 75 of the Revised Laws. 



INDEX. 



PAGE 

Acetanilid, antipyrin and phenacetin, the harmful effects of, . . . . . 175 

Adulterated Foods, List of: 

January, .............. 12 

February, .............. 29 

March, 49 

April, 67 

May, 88 

June, 113 

July 136 

August, ............... 172 

September, 192 

October 216 

November 240 

December, 258 

American Statistical Association, quarterly publications of the (December, 1908) , . 16 

Animal diseases transmissible to man, ......... 264 

Anterior Poliomyelitis : 

Declared to be a disease dangerous to the public health, ..... 219 
Occurrence of, in Massachusetts in 1908, ....... 139, 147 

Antipyrin, the harmful effects of, ......... . 175 

Boston, infant mortality of, during the period June 1 to Nov. 30, 1907, ... 31 

Carcasses of Certain Domestic Animals : 

An act relative to the branding and stamping of, ...... 94 

An act relative to inspection and sale of, ........ 94 

An act relative to marking of, .......... 95 

Cereal, presence of, in meat products must be indicated upon the label, . . . 276 

Clothing, enforcement of statute relative to manufacture of, in tenements and 

dwellings, ............. 54 

Cocaine: 

Amendment of law relative to sale of, ......... 75 

Pennsylvania's new law concerning, ......... 99 

Commercial pasteurization of milk, .......... 177 

Dairies, Inspection of: 

January, .............. 13 

February, . 30 

March, 50 

May, 89 

June, 115 

July, 138 

August, 174 

September, . ............. 195 

October, • -JlS 

November, .............. 242 

December, . 260 



278 

PAGE 

Dairies supplying milk for public sale in Fall River, facts relating to, . . . 197 

Dairymen, amendment of law for the protection of, ....... 91 

Deaths, Weekly Return's of, from Cities and Towns: 

January, . 3 

February, .............. 21 

March 41 

April 59 

May, 79 

June, 106 

July, 127 

August, 165 

September, 185 

October, 207 

November 233 

December 251 

^Diseased meat, and its relation to meat inspection, . . ..... 220 

Diseases, animal, transmissible to man, ......... 264 

Diseases dangerous to the public health, amendments of laws relative to persons in- 
fected with, 96, 97 

Drinking cup, common, the State of Kansas and the, 203 

Drinking cups (school), death in, 244 

Fall River, facts relating to dairies supplying milk for public sale in, 197 

House fly, the, as an agent in the dissemination of infectious diseases, ... 68 

Infant mortality and its intimate relation with the milk supply, .... 33 

Infantile mortality of Boston during the period June 1 to Nov. 30, 1907, ... 31 
Infantile paralysis, occurrence of, in Massachusetts in 1908, .... 139, 147 

Infectious diseases, the house fly as an agent in the dissemination of, 68 
Infectious Diseases, "Weekly Returns of Cases of : 

January, .............. 9 

February, 26 

March, 46 

April 64 

May 85 

June "110 

July 133 

August, 170 

September, ' 190 

October, 213 

November, 238 

December, 256 

Infectious Diseases, Weekly Returns of Deaths from : 

January, 8 

February, .25 

March, 45 

April, 63 

May, 84 

June 109 

July 132 

August, 169 

September 189 

October 212 

November, 237 

December, 255 

Inspection of domestic animals, an act relative to, . . . . ■ . . . 95 



279 

PAGE 

Inspection of Food and Drugs, Monthly Reports on : 

January, 10 

February 27 

March 47 

April, 65 

May, 80 

June, ............... Ill 

July, 134 

August 170 

September, 190 

October, 214 

November, 238 

December, 256 

Inspection and sale of carcasses of certain domestic animals, ..... 04 

Inspectors and collectors of milk, new law relative to appointment of, . . . 90 

Jefferson (Mass.) , outbreak of typhoid fever at, ....... 198 

Kansas, the State of, and the common drinking cup, 203 

Maynard, outbreak of typhoid fever at, ........ 262 

Meat, diseased, and its relation to meat inspection, . 220 

Meat products, presence of cereal in, must be indicated upon label, .... 276 

Merrimack River, report of State Board of Health upon sanitary condition of, . . 35 
Milk: 

Inspectors and collectors of, new law relative to appointment of, 90 

On sale in Massachusetts, composition of, 51 

The commercial pasteurization of, ......... 177 

Milk dealers, an act relative to licensing, ......... 92 

Milk supply, infant mortality and its intimate relation with the, .... 33 

Occupation mortality statistics of Sheffield, England, 1890-1907, .... 16 

Ophthalmia Neonatorum : 

Declared to he a disease dangerous to the public health, ..... 90 

Preventive treatment, law concerning, etc., .... ... 72 

Pennsylvania's new cocaine law, .......... 99 

Phenacetin, the harmful effects of, ......... . 175 

Proprietary Preparations : 

Advertised as unsalable during 1908 52 

Advertised as unsalable during 1909 51, 76, 117, 219, 248 

Prohibition of sale removed from certain, . . . . . . 53, 76, 99, 201 

Prosecutions for Sale of Adulterated Food and Drugs: 

January, .............. 11 

February 28 

March 48 

April 66 

May, 87 

June, 112 

July, 135 

August, 171 

September , 191 

October, 215 

November, 239 

December, 257 

Purification of sewage, an act relative to works for the, ...... 98 

Sausage products, presence of cereal in, must he indicated upon the label, . . 276 

School drinking cups, death in, ... . "244 

Sewage, an act to provide for works for the treatment or purification of, . . . 98 



280 

PAGE 

Slaughtering of Certain Domestic Animals: 

An net relative to, . ............ 94 

Resolve to authorize the State Board of Health to investigate the, ... 93 

State inspector of health, resignation and appointment of, ..... 204 

Trachoma, declared to be a disease dangerous to the public health, ... 90 
Typhoid Fever: 

Differentiation of outbreaks of, due to water, milk, flies and contact, . . . 117 

Outbreak of, at Jefferson, 198 

Outbreak of, at Maynard, 262 

Typhoid tourniquet, 123 

Vaccination, 14