‘* 149 O8 24 ee we. “oe ee ®@ eee va ea tae A NA * 4 ‘a J ‘* ) dl ima Lee re bagve eer eet aban ‘+ ear ee oe 4 : . a) thee sArveee een one aI ela cmalsutine’ hou ee Ha 44 » 1 ‘hs | ' 4 reant eed ee ‘eur eeae roo ¥ ony WOOK v sane : VAAN OD ' Y ‘4a + @he tet ie dhea dee 4 rug ee Te | ‘tee ‘eee we ‘ eit eala Sern tenn eae hay ‘ ‘a eo se eee) Fee 0 ‘ Te ee ee eA DEW) 5 tsaanue Stee aadean *eeoeweru sa ah ons ' ‘ ime saver ehaewa te te oie a Se ’ 4 1 «9 ' ‘ ;o eae ,veVeu a eas Oe Oe a a ee | ' tye aoe gae ten 11 eh Dye Oe ee ODD Sra voad ' a oe our yy ‘ ; ‘ ' bane hae Tr We a | 4 ‘ ’ ‘ wa i ave » " ; ; ’ eo 'o4 64 ERB ee) ’ : ’ he 6 &eehad ' 0.9 't 6.9 , ; \ ‘ ‘ »% 7, taser Le vegh ote ah wie lee ge al " _ a yuiaa'y het Oe Oe he gegnre Ph, bi el Ae ee » 4 4 a ee ee | fe hoo Vea pee hv eoae ead oer e ean ~~ ‘aby a ww er +5 i ae yy sae 4 ‘oe wtas ‘at's eH bt aeen Gg oer RATT Toes 7 yO) ’ ne Peean tare Vata) Bo bel ee ek ae We ie GS ’ ' ' peqgayeeh eed he Oe Ae OOD eae he Ye Tit ’ P| ‘ . te A) ’ Vay ee coe at hk ei Be UT 4 ” ‘ 4 ,hP Ped Pee Pte Oho Dah pe ange ta a . 1 ; ‘LOOP EFM DAE Ma Em F ove ett Way , so oe | Se ee ee sree i ARs eM A a | fig’ ys , ‘ 4/4 ete @ “ , ' ‘ ‘ Coe te) 4 ve eee ; ¢ REL COOL: } Pye AC ee ne . a ee ) 4 "? ‘ ‘ a J . Ye Wee TA ee at . ee re Le 4 os + Tie WR Pe Oo 8 a VW ; Ne fn ie Le Ck od | | itty ye eR VOLE ® ‘ere eh Yee , 4 ee haa P Rani ans Me ee ee Wes A bi) he te ee i , ty Ime he ge Rt Bae ‘ * * 7 ' i; } r ) ‘ yer me $I» 4 * y; tL hg fe ARS an BMG ge OP ye A) Mgt Me Bley, he oe 9 mp fate’ +! hs ben h Belk oy bday m vow einat : ‘ DH yelp: ote +) 8s death ey pO mech! FECL eR GET AES air: Ps it aig yg te © * Ks hy | «| ea he : a . } 5 ’ ’ ' ’ ' < % hie 5 = vi ‘ oF ¥ 4 vir | a ee a ee “to Far hey ey ey, an ta) €% : ee L # 4 -% a ‘ ; "4 ‘ 5 ‘ i a ee 7 oe y’ tf , i erg : : 1 ‘att ’ f Z hee 2. 9- F rs. bP Re 595 * } e 9 (¢ v4 : ; ‘3 a 1 4 he yy + Spi dnthe ? ' fad te f PE PS Se Dey De Nn fe Se TSN be Ba On te ee ee ponte Poe EER OF eo Poh EOS Ee ee ee Hh a) ee Sadr, ¥ Sat , ee ety ah > Fe Tt Eee EGE S Et ii b yaa v4 at & & a TAD LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Al URBANA-CHAMPAIGN =e = Bye 8 | ees ea Smee Sem eaters CBG, jt GOD. =~ = — a“ =B)S 2B 4: y - SSP = =e: af i BIOLOGY ACES LIBRARY iy a é MEN ? ie Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2013 http://archive.org/details/transactionsproc6188phil TRANSACTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS AND Ber hh OSE OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY of SOUTH AUSTRALIA. a os eS eS a Die (FOR 1882-83.) ISSUED DECEMBER, 1888. Avelaivde : G. ROBERTSON, 103, KING WILLIAM STREET. ———$— 1883. Parcels for transmission to the Royal Society of South Aus- tralia, from Europe and America, should be addressed *‘ per W. C. Rigby, care Messrs. Thos. Meadows & Co., 35, Milk Street, Cheapside, London.”’ Aopal Society of South Australia. Lie 4 FS, ee eS = = be . aN Sa Salton 4 4 ¥ ” Gire-Datrow : HIS EXCELLENCY SIR WILLIAM ROBINSON, K.0.M.G., C.B., &c. Our EE © © 3) ae [ELECTED OCTOBER 2, 1883.1] axresivent : H. T. WHITTELL, ESQ., M.D. Gite-Dresivents: PROF. H. LAMB, M.A. | E. C. STIRLING, ESQ., M.D., F.R.C.S. How. secretary: How. Crersurer, W. L. CLELAND, ESQ., M.B. THOS. D. SMEATON, ESQ. Other Members of Council: D. B. ADAMSON, ESQ. PROF. TATE, F.G.8., F.L.8., &e. WALTER RUTT, ESQ. (National Science Director) . C. TODD, C.M.G., F.R.A.S. (Re- presentative Governor) Assistant Secretary: MR: A. MOLINEUX. ©. (NCES LIBRARY Dr. J. Davies Thomas: Hydatid Disease in Australia .. vs = D. B.. Adamson: Improvements in the construction of Curre’s Di- electric Machine .. at <8 ve ee es - * F. W. Andrews: Notes on the Night-Parrot (Geopsittacus occidentalis) Baron Sir F. von Mueller: Diagnoses of a new genus and two species of Composit from South Australia oe er aa oi Baron Sir F. von Mueller: Diagnosis of a New Genus of Verbenacexe from Arnheim Land os i and he si ad James Stirling: The Proteacee of the Victorian Alps .. oe Dr. H. T. Whittell: Notes of the Dissection of a oS og a Ascidian found in St. Vincent Gulf (plate i.) .. : oe ee i Professor R. Tate: Descriptions of some of New Species of Squilla from South Australia (plate ii.).. a ee A BA me John Haslam: House Sanitation .. sia ae ee ae et J.G. O. Tepper: Botanical Notes relating to South Australia .. ie F. W. Andrews: Notes on some Rare Birds inhabiting South Australia T. C. Cloud: A Catalogue of South Australian Minerals .. aie ale Professor R. Tate: List of Plants unrecorded for Southern Eyre-Penin- sula.. ae 0% = eo a Ay a Ae - Professor R. Tate: A list of unrecorded Plants and of New Localities for Rare Plants in the South-East es ae aye ae e Professor R. Tate: List of some Plants inhabiting the North-Eastern part of the Lake Torrens Basin hs oe Js me “ Baron Mueller and Professor Tate: Diagnoses of some New Piants from South Australia .. ae » aa oy ee Professor R. Tate: Additions to the Flora of South Australia .. 3a Professor R. Tate: The Botany of Kangaroo Island, with Historical Sketch of its Discovery and Settlement, and Notes on its Geology | i ee - is a oe ne 100 107 110 116 iv. Miseellaneous Contributions to the Natural History of South Australia— ZooLoey. Note on the Occurrence of Psalidura in South Australia eager Notes on three South Australian ascii: destructive to. Vegetation che 8 a , ae re Pa Wp List of Marine Mollusea, Rottnest, Freemantle.. side edo Botany. Bibliographical Notes refuting .the alleged alien nature of Orobanche australiana and Verbena officinalis .. -. 174 Notes on Microstemma tuberosum .. a ‘3 - ~ L75 Note on the presence of Tannin in Muehlenbeckia Cunninghamii 175 Oa HYDATID ‘ J HSE IN ‘AUSTRALIA. an By J. Dai Bios, igi London. [Read October ad eat BAR eer ty can re [ ABRIDGED. | The Royal Society has on several occasions shown an interest in questions respecting the common weal and health, and has, I feel sure, contributed to no small degree in educating the public on some matters closely connected with general hygiene. I therefore venture to think that any communication which has for its object the prevention of disease, pain, and death will meet with lenient criticism and friendly reception from the members of this Society. Apart from the importance of the hydatid as a cause of disease in man and stock, its dig lh is of great interest from a purely scientific point of view; so that any hesitancy I may feel is not because the subject ‘is bald of interest, but rather lest the writer may prove unequal to his theme. In dealing with hydatids, there are two points of view from which the subject may be regarded. Thus we may consider it merely from a biological standpoint, and study the parasite itself, its mode of origin, growth, and death, in the various phases of its life-history; or we may consider it from a medical aspect, as causing a disease often great in its painfulness and terrible in its danger to man and beast. In connection with this latter view we might further discuss (1) the mode of its prevention, and (2) the best mode of treat- ment when it is present. The subject will, however, be pre- sented to your notice only asa brief summary of what I have been able to learn about the prevalence of hydatid disease in man, and chiefly as concerns the Southern Hemisphere; and I shall also endeavour to point out how the risk of infection may be reduced to more moderate limits. On our way we shall see that there are many points upon which more information is needed, and in the investigation of which some members of this Society may do good service to science and to public health. Dr. Thomas then gave an exhaustive account of the natural history of Echinococcus, as far as present knowledge of the / 2 subject permits, and briefly summarised the matter as fol- lows:— What is known as the hydatid cyst is really the cystic or bladder-worm phase of development of a minute tapeworm which inhahits the upper part of the small intestine of the dog. Three varieties of the hydatid have been described, viz., the Acephalocystic form, where no scolices or daughter-cysts are found; the variety called Echinococcus Scolicipariens, where brood-capsules and scolices are present; and finally, Echino- coccus Altricipariens, where daughter-cysts are developed. There are good reasons, however, for the opinion that these forms do not mark distinct species, but merely variations of one species. I may remind you also of the remarkable transmuta- tions and transmigrations undergone during the complete lfe- cycle of this parasite; how the adult tapeworm inhabits in great numbers the small intestine of the dog, but in which animal the hydatid cyst has never been found; that the last joint filled with ripe ova passes from the intestine of the dog into the outer world, and that the eggs are conveyed by the various ex- ternal forces of nature into drinking water, and that they are scattered on grass and herbage ; that the egg becomes swal- lowed by some herbivorous animal or by man, and that then the egg-shell becomes digested in the stomach, thus releasing the six-hooked boring embryo formerly enclosed within it. That the embryo begins at once to bore its way into the coats of the stomach until it reaches the inside of a small blood vessel, where it is caught in the current of blood, and conveyed to the capillaries of the portal system within the liver; here the majority rest and develope into hydatids. Some of them, how- ever, pass through the capillaries of the liver and enter the general and pulmonary circulation. In this way it follows that any organ of the body may become the resting place of an embryo, which proceeds to continue its development into a hydatid. We shall find from the statistics of the disease that the lungs, heart, brain, spleen, kidney, muscles, and bones are all hable to be attacked, although by no means in a like propor- tion. The six-hooked embryo then proceeds to change into a hydatid cyst. This in turn produces by a process of budding the Echinococci. The Echinococci when transplanted into the small intestine of the dog develope into the Scolices. These now form joints, two or three in number, and the last one of these contains the ripe eggs. To such curious series of changes Steenstrup gave the name of the ‘‘alternation of generations.” in sheep and oxen the cystic form of the parasite exists in the liver, lung, and other organs; but they never have the little tapeworm in the bowel. The hydatid lives, not on chyme, as the tapeworm does in the intestine of .the dog, 3 but on fluids secreted by itself from the blood of its host. It is extremely important to remember that sheep and oxen get the hydatid, and the dog the tapeworm. No one has ever seen this rule reversed in the case of Echinococcus. Man, in his relation to Echinococcus, resembles the sheep and ox, and not the dog, for he gets the hydatid cyst, but not the little tapeworm. The great practical fact is this:—That if there were no dogs we should not get hydatid disease. Hating underdone mutton or beef can never give us hydatids, though it might give us certain kinds of tapeworms. The dog, how- ever, would not get Tenia Echinococcus if it did not swallow living scolices from hydatid cysts. Now, if all this be correct, we can see that the existence of a great many dogs, sheep, oxen, pigs, &¢c., in a country produce favourable conditions for the propagation of hydatid disease in man, for the ereater the number of dogs the greater the number of hosts for the tapeworm form, and in like manner the greater the number of sheep, &c., the greater the number of hosts for the cystic form. There are four chief factors which determine the spread of hydatid disease in any country :—1l. The number of dogs inthe country. 2. The opportunities that exist for enabling the eggs, bred in the dog, to be swallowed by the sheep. 3. The number of sheep, oxen, pigs, &c. 4. The fre- quency with which dogs eat the organs of infected sheep con- taining living hydatids. Take a country with many sheep, the organs of which are often eaten raw by dogs, let the water supply be scanty and procured from bogs, swamps, waterholes, and dams, on the banks of which dogs may deposit the eggs, to be blown in by the winds, and washed in by the rain ; let there be dogs in abundance, and we then have all the condi- tions necessary to the spread of the disease. THE GEOGRAPHICAL DisTRIBUTION OF Hypatip DISEASE. This disease is known to occur with greater or less frequency in all countries inhabited by Europeans or their immediate descendants. From Great Britain to America, from Denmark to Bengal, from Iceland in the north to New Zealand in the south, may this ubiquitous parasite be found. It would be safe, J think, to assert that wherever man and his faithful com- panion and servant, the dog, are found together, there will be found, with greater or less frequency, hydatid disease in the former. But the, frequency of the disease varies greatly in different countries, and I shall give you as briefly as I can, the facts bearing upon this point, at least as far asI have been able to ascertain them. More particularly, I shall bring before your notice, figures illustrating the frequency of the 4. disease in Australia. As British subjects, we naturally ask, in the first place, how often this disease occurs in our ancestral home. Hypatip DisEasE IN Great Brrrarin.—When I entered upon the investigation of this question it seemed to me that there were two sources from which some reliable information might be gleaned, viz.:—Ilst, the Annual Mortality Returns of the Registrar-General of Births, Deaths, and Marriages ; and 2nd, the annual records of the various hospitals. From the former source we might expect to learn how many persons die every year in Great Britain from hydatid disease, and from the latter how many patients come under treatment from this cause in the various hospitals. I regret to state that the amount of information from either source that I have as yet succeeded in acquiring is by no means so extensive as I could wish, for I have had at my disposal a few only of the Annual Reports of the Registrar-General of Births, Deaths, and Mar- riages for England and Wales, and I have been unable to learn anything about Scotland and Ireland. Through the kindness of Mr. Cleland, the obliging Registrar- General for South Australia, I have been able to examine the annual reports of the Registrar-General for England and Wales for the decade 1871 to 1881. During these ten years there died in England and Wales—Males, 2,679,416 ; females, 2,498,895 ; total, 5,178,311. Of these 486 persons were re- ported to have died of hydatid disease, being at the rate of one out of every 11,876 deaths. Now, I think with Dr. Cobbold, that this return is very far below the true one, for many cases of hydatid disease, fatal and otherwise, are no doubt not re- cognised as such. However, we must for the present accept the figures as they stand. In round numbers, then, we must assume that about one death out of every 12,000 in England and Wales for the decade 1871 to 1881 was due to hydatid disease. And now what do the hospital records teach us? About three years ago I forwarded to the authorities of a large number of London and provincial hospitals printed forms seeking mformation upon this point. Out of several dozens of such appeals, only two received any attention, for replies reached me only from the London Hospital and the Bristol Royal Infirmary. However, I have attained access in another way to the statistics of St. Bartholomew’s Hospital for the decade 1869 to 1879, and 1o those of St. Thomas’ Hospital for the four years 1876 to 1880. The return of the London Hos- pital extends over the five years, 1876 to 1881; that for the Bristol Royal Infirmary includes only the year 1880. However, 5 by throwing together the returns of those four hospitals we get an idea of twenty years of hospital work in Great Britain, and they show that in all 110 cases of hydatids were under treatment. During the same period there were about 99,000 in-patients, medical and surgical, treated, so that about one case out of every 900 treated in these institutions during the periods in question was one of hydatids. As far, then, as the data at our disposal extend, we may conclude that about one death out of every 12,000 in England and Wales during the decade 1871- 81 was due to hydatids, and that about one out of every 900 in- ae of the four hospitals mentioned was a case of ydatids. GERMANY, FRANCE, ITaty, Ausrria, AND Russra.—As far as I have been able to ascertain no data exist to show the prevalence of hydatids in these countries. However, the occurrence of the parasite in France, Germany, and Italy is certain. Hypatip Diskas— In Iceranp.—This country holds the unenviable position of being the one most highly intested with Echinococcus disease, and it may be instructive to devote some attention to the matter. It appears certain that hydatid disease has been just as prevalent in Iceland for cen- turies past as it is at the present time, for the earliest medical records of the country contain references to the prevalence of an affection of the liver, which could have been nothing other than this parasitic disease. Up to the present time an exact estimate of the frequency of the disease cannot be given, for the medical men resident in the country do not agree as to the proportion of the population at- tacked. ‘Then, a great many persons have hydatids, and yet die of some other complaint; moreover, post-mortem ex- aminations are made comparatively rarely ; and, lastly, many of the victims of the disease recover by the efforts of unaided nature. However, many good authorities believe that from one-fitth to one-seventh of the entire population of Iceland suffers from hydatid disease. Other medical observers regard this estimate as too high, and consider that from one-fiftieth to one-sixtieth would be a more correct calculation. On the whole it seems to me that the balance of evidence points in the direction of the higher rather than of the lower figures. The Danish Government was so impressed with the gravity and extent of the evil that in 1863 it deputed a distinguished hel- minthologist, M. Krabbe, to investigate and report upon this question, and the result of his inquiries appeared in a treatise published in 1866, written, fortunately for us, in French, and not in Danish. He points out that the prevalence of hydatids 6 in man is in correlation to the frequency with which sheep and oxen suffer from the same disease, and, above all, in correspon- dence with the very common presence of the adult tapeworm in the dogs of Iceland. In Iceland, at the time of Krabbe’s report, there were for every 100 inhabitants 488 sheep and 36 horned cattle ; pigs, however, were scarce. Now, the propor- tion of sheep and cattle per 100 inhabitants in Great Britain, according to Mulhall’s balance-sheet of the world, 1870 to 1880, is—sheep 93, cows 29. So that if we include under the com- mon title of ‘domestic herbivora’”’ sheep and horned cattle, we shall see that in Great Britain, per 100 persons, there were of domestic herbivora 122; in Iceland, 524. Tersely, then, in Iceland there are per head of human population more than four times as many possible hosts for hydatids as there are in Great Britain. Now, as regards the possible hosts of the tapeworm, ze., the dogs. According to Krabbe there was in Great Britain in 1855 about one dog to every 50 inhabitants. In Iceland, at the time of his investigation, about one dog to every three to five inhabitants, z.e., there were, at his lowest computation, ten times as many dogs per head of population in Iceland as in Great Britain. From this it follows, other things being equal, that an Icelander was threatened with hydatid infection from the dogs ten times more than an Eng- lishman, and, besides that, every Icelandic dog had four times as many chances of eating the host of an hydatid as an English dog. But there are two other very important points to con- sider, viz., the opportunities that the dogs have of eating hydatids, and the chances of a man swallowing the eggs of the tapeworm. Of course the number of domestic herbivora and of dogs form only two elements in the chain of causation of hydatid disease. The most important elements by far are the numbers of these animals infested with the parasite, and the chances of mutual infection of the dogs and domestic herbivora. And, first, how many sheep, for example, are there affected with hydatids in the two countries? As regards Great Britain I have no data, but as concerns Iceland we have some facts, and in this connection I cannot do better than quote the fol- lowing statement by Dr. J. Hjaltelin, who for many years was the chief medical officer for Iceland. He writes :— “T have for many years been investigating how frequent this disease is in the Icelandic sheep, and I have come to the conclusion that traces of it are found in more than every fifth sheep ; nearly all the peasants have ascertained that this parasite may be found in every third sheep that is more than three years old. In a district called Skaptar-Syssel, with about 3,000 inhabitants and 22,000 sheep, the Echinococci are said to be found in every adult sheep, and it is worth attention Ss ae = 7 that just in this district every third adult person is said to have hydatids. Whether this is exact or not i cannot tell, but thus it was stated to me by a physician who has been serving there for more than thirty years.” So much for the preva- lence of hydatids in the chief domestic herbivora of that country; and now let us turn our attention to the dogs of Ice- land. Krabbe examined 100 Icelandic dogs, and found that in 28 of these Tenia Echinococcus was present, often in vast numbers. In Copenhagen he examined 500 dogs, but found this worm present in only two instances. Thus Tenia Echino- coccus is seventy times as common in Icelandic dogs as in those of Copenhagen. According to Cobbold, who is the first authority on helminthology in Great Britain, Tznia Hchino- coccus has never been found present in any English dogs which had not previously been fed experimentally upon hydatids. This quite corresponds with the comparatively rare occurrence of hydatid disease in England. Then it must be remembered that in a country where sheep are so numerous, the dogs enjoy innumerable opportunities of eating the livers and lungs of sheep affected with Echinococcus, and thus they come to harbour vast numbers of the little tapeworms. And now as regards the last link in the chain of causation of hydatids, viz., the swallowing by man of the eggs of the tapeworms. All travellers whose works on Iceland I have read draw special and fre- quent attention to the gross uncleanliness of the people. Sheep, cows, and dogs live under the same roof as the family during the long weary months of Iceland’s bitter winter. The houses are devoid of ventilation, and almost entirely of lght. The configuration of the country is such that extensive bogs and swamps alternate with lofty mountains, large rivers, and numerous lakes of all dimensions. The bogs and swamps are just the most suitable receptacles for the eggs of the tapeworm, deposited in myriads on the long matted grass, or more solid hummocks that often stud the area of the swamps. Then, owing to the diet of the people being largely composed of stock-fish, seurvy is common, and raw vegetables are a delicacy and greedily consumed, thus giving another agent for the con- veyance of the ova into the body. No doubt the three chief media are the bog and swamp-water used for drinking pur- poses; the consumption of raw vegetables, upon which the eggs have been deposited; and the habit of allowing dogs to cleanse the plates by licking them. Even the stock-fish that constitutes the staple article of diet is heedlessly piled on the filthy floor of the dwelling-house, ready to become befouled by the dogs. The prevalence of the disease among the sheep is explicable in lke manner by the swamp-water drunk, and the grass eaten by them. “The only land cultivated in Iceland. is 8 the tun, which is a meadow surrounding the house, varying in extent according to the number of cows kept on the farm. This field is dressed with their dung, and produces the ha which constitutes the food of the cattle during the winter’ (Baring Gould, p. 45). It is evident how easily the grass and hay of this small meadow may become infested with the minute ova of the innumerable Tenia harboured by the numerous dogs of an Icelandic homestead. Hypatip DIsEasE IN THE AUSTRALASIAN COLONIES. I think that most of the intelligent public of Australia have known or heard that hydatid disease is a common one in this Southern Britain, but hitherto no extensive investigation into the prevalence and causes of this disease has been undertaken in Australia. Now, as this malady is, theoretically at least, perfectly preventible, and as moreover it may, I believe, be practically reduced in extent, I think that the entire subject is worthy of careful study and close investigation. Of course the first step in any such inquiry is to ascertain as far as possible the extent and local distribution of the disease; and in the case of Australia, as in that of Great Britain, we may hope to get reliable data from—I1st. The mortality returns of the various colonies; and, 2nd. The records of the hospital in each province. I mentioned my desire to the Hon. W. Morgan, who was Chief Secretary of South Australia at the time I com- menced this work, and he most kindly offered to use his influ- ence with the Governments of the other colonies to further my inquiry. I beg to offer my most cordial thanks, not only to - Mr. Morgan, but also to the Hon. J. C. Bray, who has also greatly aided me. Through the kind influence of our two Chief Secretaries, I have also received the greatest assistance from Mr. Graham Berry and Sir Bryan O’Loughlen in Victoria, and from Sir Henry Parkes in New South Wales. Equally ready and courteous help has been given by the Governments of Queensland, New Zealand, and Tasmania. Not only have the Governments of all the colonies given their powerful and in- deed indispensable aid, but the hospital officials and public registrars have ungrudgingly and carefully taken infinite pains to supply the facts required. I cannot too gratefully . acknowledge my obligations to my fellow-workers in this cause, and can only earnestly hope that great public good will result from the publication of the facts supplied by them. I shall first draw your attention to the hydatid statistics of the various colonies, and then I shall endeavour to point out the causes of the striking prevalence of the disease in some ot them. From all the colonies of Australasia replies to my questions have been received, but as might have been expected, er 9 the amount of information obtained is not equal in all cases. Thus I may dismiss Western Australia very briefly. In March, 1878, the Colonial Secretary wrote that he regretted his, in- ability to supply information as to deaths from hydatid disease, because “under the Registration Act of this colony, it is not compulsory on individuals registering deaths to produce the certificate of a professional man; consequently, causes of death in most instances are recorded in general terms, and it would be impossible to render any return of the kind required, there being no reliable data at command.” As regards Vic- toria, New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, New Zealand, and Tasmania the case is different. Vicrorta.— Before giving you the statistics of the province, I cannot refrain from expressing my admiration of the exhaus- tive character of the returns, and of the promptitude with which they were supplied. The details of official records in Vic- toria must be as near perfection as possible. In the first place, let me remind you that by the census taken in 1881 the popu- lation of Victoria amounted in round numbers to 862,000 souls, of whom rather more than one half were males. The mean annual mortality of the colony has lately been 13°5 per 1,000 inhabitants. And now as regards the number of deaths attri- buted to hydatid disease. From the Registrar-General’s returns, it appears that during the twenty years, from the commencement of 1862 to the close of 1881, 584 persons died from hydatids. Of these there were of males, 338 ; of females, 246; total, 584; and during the fourteen years, 1868 to 1881, it appears that 2°98 per thousand of all the deaths in the province were caused by hydatids. I will not inflict upon you the details of the annual figures, put I wish to mention that upon the whole there has been during these twenty years a constant but somewhat irregular increase in the mortality from hydatids with advancing time. This is particularly conspicuous when we compare the four quinquennial periods embraced within the twenty years. Thus :—First quinquennium, 1862 to 1867, 59 cases ; second do., 1867 to 1872, 112 cases; third do., 1872 to 1877, 182 cases; fourth do., 1877 to 1882, 281 cases ; total, 584 cases. This steady and gradual increase is evidently due to one or both of two causes, viz., either hydatid disease is becoming more prevalent in Victoria, or the Registrar-General is being more accurately informed as to the true causes of death. But of course it must be borne in mind that the popu- lation of Victoria has increased greatly during these twenty years. Thus :—Population of Victoria, 1862, 554,358 souls ; do., 1882, 862,346 souls. But then, in the last ‘quinquennium there were nearly four times as many deaths from hydatids as in the first quinquennium, whilst the population was 10 not nearly twice as great—probably only about half as much again. As regards the ages of the victims, no age was exempt—the child, the adult, the old, all succumbed to this parasite. Thus :—Under 10 years of age there were 386 deaths; from 10 to 20, 57 do.; from 20 to 30, 89 do.; from 380 to 40, 100 do.; from 40 to 50, 109 do.; from 50 to 60, 73 do.; over GO years of age, 32 do.; ages not stated, 4 do.; total, 500 deaths. These numbers include the deaths in the fourteen years, 1868 to 1882. I have not the data as regards age prior to 1868. From these figures it will be seen that the number of deaths increases steadily with advancing age up to 50. Afterwards the numbers diminish. This is not because people are less liable to hydatids after fifty, but because the greater proportion of people die before reaching that age. Now as regards the data supplied by the hospital records of Victoria, I have received returns from the following hospitals :— Alexandra, Alfred, Ballarat, Beechworth, Belfast, Castlemaine, Clunes, Creswick, Daylesford, Dunolly, Geelong, Heathcote, Horsham, Inglewood, Kilmore, Kyneton, Maldon, Mansfield, Maryborough, Melbourne, Pleasant Creek, Portland, St. Arnaud, Sale, Sandhurst, Swan Hill, Wangaratta, Warrnambool, Woods Point. I need not trouble you with the details of these returns, but I shall pick out those facts only which are of general interest. In some of these institutions no cases of this disease were recorded in the books. This was the case at the Belfast, Maldon, Mansfield, Swan Hill, and Warrnambool Hospitals. In the remaining hospitals, however, no fewer than 1,001 cases had been treated. Of these, the result was unknown in 373. In 206 instances death was known to have resulted, so that we can reckon the mortality of hydatid disease even under the best available treatment as at least 20 per cent., and per- sonally I am convinced that this is much below the real figure, for many cases are discharged from hospitals, and leave the care of their medical advisers, which are apparently cured, and yet come back in a few months or years worse than ever. Now taking the lowest estimate—z.e., 20 per cent.—as fatal, and remembering that the Registrar- General’s report for 20 years _ gave 584 deaths from this disease, it follows that in Victoria there were about 3,000 cases of hydatids during the 20 years 1861 to 1882. I think that this estimate of preventible disease is sufficiently startling, and not only justifies, but urgently invites, Inquiry. And yet one case of smallpox would receive more attention than these 3,000 sufferers have done—at any rate, at the hands of the official cuardians of the public health. As regards the proportion in which the two sexes were attacked, some information may be given :—Sex not stated, 171 cases; males, 493; females, 337; total, 1,001. 11 There was thus a preponderance of cases in males, but as there has been a hn a propond larger number of males than females in Victoria until quite lately, there cannot be much import- ance attached to the disparity of sexes attacked by hydatids. The proportion in which the different organs of the body were attacked was very interesting, but as I shall consider this point in connection with the total number of cases oceurring in all the colonies, [ need not discuss it here. It is important to no- tice that if we take the hospitals of Victoria as a whole, there was about one case out of every 175 of the total indoor patients treated suffering from hydatid disease. I may remind you that in the four English hospitals the proportion was one hydatid out of about every 900 patients, so that it appears that hydatid disease is more than five times as common in Victorian as in the four English hospitals. But the different hospitals of Victoria itself did not show a like proportion of cases. Thus no cases at all, as I have already stated, were recorded in the Belfast, Maldon, Mansfield, Portland, Swan Hill, and Warr- nambool Hospitals, and yet between them they had 5,639 in- patients during the periods over which their returns extended. Soutn Avustrrati1a.—According to the census taken in April, 1881, the total population amounted to 279,865 — males, 149,530; females, 130,835. The death-rate in 1881 was 13°90 per 1,000. The Registrar-General’s returns of hydatid deaths, for which I am indebted to the kindness of J. F. Cleland, Esq., extend over the 16 years from 1866 to 1881. In six of these years, viz., 1866-70 and 72, no deaths were returned as due to hydatids. In 1871 there was returned 1 death; in 1873 there were 3 deaths; 1874, 1; 1875, 2; 1876 and 1877, to- gether, 11; 1878-79, 3; 1880-81, 13; total, 34. So that for all the 16 years in question there were only 34 deaths attri- buted to this parasite. Now, if we take the last ten years, z.e., from 1872 to 1881 inclusive, we find that there were 33 deaths from hydatids out of a total of 34,431 deaths (Statistical Register for 1881, page 25) occuring during the same period ; so that hydatid disease is credited with having caused about one death out of every 1,043 during the last ten years. I am inclined to think that this is considerably below the number of deaths that actually occurred from this parasite. And now as | regards the data supplied by the records of the various hospitals in the province. Of such institutions there are nine, viz., the Adelaide, Mount Gambier, Port Adelaide, Port Augusta, Port Lincoln, Wallaroo, Kapunda, Blinman, and Burra Hospitals. Of these the only ones which are large enough to supply any information on this subject are the two first named.. I am indebted to Mr. E. H. Hallack for the very exhaustive returns of the Adelaide Hospital, which extend over a period 12 of 30 years, viz., 1852 to 1882. During this time 158 cases of | hydatids were recognised and treated. There were inall under treatment as in-patients 36,556 persons, so that about one case of every 245—exactly 244°68— in-patients was hydatids. As regards the results of the treatment, we find that in 13 cases the results were not given; of the remaining 145, 20 died whilst in hospital, being at the rate of 12°66 per cent. The Mount Gambier Hospital——I\ have to thank Dr. Jackson, lately Assistant Colonial Surgeon, for the statistics of this hospital during the seven years 1873 to 1880, and they are very significant. During these seven years 36 cases of hydatid disease were under treatment. During the same period there were of in-patients 1,905. So that no less than one case out of every 52°9 was hydatid disease. I am convinced that out of Iceland no place in the known world is so badly infested with this parasite as the South-Eastern district of this colony, which supplies the majority of the inmates of the Mount Gambier hospital. As I shall revert to this point afterwards, I need not discuss it here. In order to strike an average for the hospitals of South Australia we must add together the results of the Adelaide and Mount Gambier Hospitals. This will show us that about one case out of 198 in-patients suffered from hydatids. QUEENSLAND. — According to Hayter, the populatian of @ueensland on December 31st, 1880, was 226,077 persons. The average death-rate for the decade 1869-79 was 17°27 per 1,000. It appears that the published statistics of this colony did not contain any particulars respecting deaths from hydatid disease prior to the year 1878, so that the only data at my disposal have extended over the four years 1878 to 1882, and during this time only five deaths from this cause were registered ; so that only about one death out of 6,000 arose from hydatid disease in Queensland. The Hospital Statistics of Queensland.—Returns were sent from the hospitals at Bowen, Ipswich, Springsure, Stanthorpe, Charters Towers, Towoomba, George Town, and Maryborough. In five of these no cases of hydatids had been met with, viz., Bowen, Charters Towers, George Town, Maryborough, and Springsure. As regards the Ipswich Hospital, the return com- prises the 20 years 1860 to 1880. During this long period only two cases of hydatid disease were treated. The average number of in-patients is stated to be 300 per annum. The Stanthorpe Hospital’s record extends over the five years 1875 to 1880. Four cases only were observed, and one of these was nota hospital case. In the Toowoomba Hospital books only one case of hydatids appears. Thus it will be seen that the data pile St ad ’ ‘ 13 supplied from Queensland are too scanty to permit any numerical estimate to be made, but they show conclusively that the disease is comparatively rare in that colony. Tasmanta.—The population on December 31st, 1880, was 114,762. The mean death-rate for the decade 1869-79 was 15°59 per 1,000. First, as regards the deaths registered as due to fedatid disease :—In March, 1878, the Colonial Secretary wrote that during the ten years immediately antecedent to 1878 “no deaths from this disease were registered.’’ However, in 1878 there were two deaths, in 1879 two deaths, in 1880 one death, in 1881 one death; total, six deaths. So that in the last four years there have been six deaths from that cause. This was at the rate of ‘871 per 1,000 deaths. Hospitals of Tasmania.—Returns were received from the Hobart, Launceston, and Campbelltown Hospitals. There was no record of any case of this disease in either the Launceston or the Campbelltown Hospital. The returns of the Hobart Hospital comprise the four years 1878 to 1881 inclusive. There were thirteen cases treated suffering from hydatids. During the same period there were 4,223 in-patients, so that in the four years under our notice about one case out of 528 total in- patients was hydatid. As by some misunderstanding I have not been able to learn the total number of in-patients treated at the Campbelltown Hospital, I am unable to give the general hospital hydatid-rate for the colony, but I have reason to believe that not more than one out of every thousand cases treated is of this nature. New Zxmartanp.—Population on December 31st, 1880, 484,864 souls. Mean death-rate from 1869 to 1879, 12:17 per 1,000. The Acting Colonial Secretary, in a letter dated March 7th, 1878, states that the causes of death were not compiled by the Registrar-General’s department prior to the year 1873. A statistical return that should have accompanied this letter has not reached my hands, so that the only returns in my posses- -sion-are those for the four years 1878, 1879, 1880, and 1881, and they show that in the year 1878 the deaths from hydatids were six, equal to 1°29 per 1,000; in 1879, seven, equal to 1°25 per 1,000; in 1880, nine, equal to 1°65 per 1,000; in 1881, three, equal to 0°55 per 1,000; total, 25. So that 1°185 per 1,000 of the deaths that took place in these four years resulted from hydatid disease. In hospital returns for New Zealand replies were received from Auckland, Charlestown, Christchurch, Dunedin, Gisborne, Hokitika, Lawrence, Napier, Naseby, Nelson, New Plymouth, Oamaru, Picton, Reefton, Southland, Thames, Timaru, Wakatipa, Wellington, and Westport. In eleven of these no hydatids had been treated, viz., Charlestown, 14 Gisborne, Lawrence, Napier, Naseby, Oamaru, Picton, Reefton, Southland, Thames, and Timaru. In the nine remaining hos- pitals there had been in all 57 cases of hydatids under treat- ment, and the proportion of cases of this disease to the total in-patients, as far as I could ascertain, was one out of every 745°7. I think that this estimate is rather too high, but it is based upon the statistics at my disposal. From both the Registrar-General’s and the hospital returns it will be seen that hydatid disease is not very prevalent in New Zealand. New Soutn Wates.—