grand jury to have my testimony in regard to these places. W found all three slaughter houses in horrible condition. It seems unnecessary to describe them, for the word "horrible" covers them completely. On return to Spencer, I was duly sworn and testified in detail concerning these abominable places to the grand jury. Being released, I was invited to take a ride with Hon. Temple G. Pearson, member of the legislature. He wished to show me a farm which he thought would be a good place for locat ing the State Tuberculosis Hospital. He was well aware that the State Board of Health has nothing to do with purchasing a site, but desired me to see it. I enjoyed riding over a beautiful tract of land, owned by Mr. Poncheon. Its area was about 900 acres. It was rolling and had many beautiful views of White river in the distance. I have since learned that the tuberculosis com mission has viewed this land.

Valparaiso, June 29th.-Upon invitation from the Civic Associa tion of Valparaiso and the mayor, Mr. Williams, I visited the ~ said city, to deliver lectures and to consult with the local author ities in regard to sanitary affairs. Upon arrival, I was met at the station by the mayor and the local health officer, Dr. Evans. We immediately visited the waterworks and examined the new filtration plant, which is being constructed. The plans for said plant and everything pertaining thereto, were quite perfect, and after thorough study, I gave official approval of the same. Val. paraiso is to be congratulated that very soon the city will have an abundant supply of soft and pure filtered water.

Saturday evening, June 30th, I delivered a lecture in the Chris tian Church, before a large audience, filling the entire auditorium, upon the subject of Food and Drug Adulteration, reviewing what the State Board of Health was doing to curb the evil. On Sunday evening, July 1st, I delivered a lecture in the Methodist Church upon "The Cause, Prevention and Cure of Tuberculosis." The audience filled the entire auditorium. On Monday morning, July 2d, I addressed 1,500 students of the Valparaiso College, espe cially assembled, upon "Personal Hygiene." In the afternoon I returned home.

I must contrast this visit and my reception at a former one made six years ago. At the time of the first visit, smallpox prevailed in Valparaiso. Not one of the city physicians had been able to diagnose the disease, but Professor Kinsey, vice-president of the Valparaiso College, had arrived at a correct diagnosis. The

general attitude of the citizens was against any interference on the part of the State Board of Health, and some of them indignantly repelled our efforts to relieve the situation. In a word, I found myself very unpopular and was very unkindly received. Now, what a change, as is shown by the fact that the mayor and other officials met your representative at the station, and showed him every honor and attention, and the people came out in hundreds to hear the Gospel of Hygiene.

CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL.

The following correspondence explains itself:

Hon. Jas. Bingham, Attorney-General State of Indiana :

Dear Sir-The State Board of Health respectfully asks your opinion in regard to the following point:

The appropriation for this Board, page 680; Acts 1907, is in two parts.
The first says:

* for other expenses, such as office expenses, impure food, pollution of streams and preventing the spread of contagious and infectious diseases, the sum of ten thousand dollars."

The second says:

"For maintenance of laboratory of hygiene, purchase of food and drug samples, salaries of employes, transportation and hotel expenses of those necessary to conduct inspections, collect samples and attend prosecutions and for incidental expenses, fourteen thousand dollars."

Some of the ground covered by the last quoted clause is also covered by the appropriation clause in the pure food law, page 158, Acts 1907.

Question 1. Will it be lawful to use any of the $14,000 for pure food work, if the appropriation of the pure food act runs out, and it is to spare?

It is our positive information that the $14,000 in the Ways and Means Act was an amendment by Senator A. J. Bowser, and that it applied to the first part and not to the second part of Section 7, and the printed law should have said fourteen instead of ten in line 14 of the Board of Health item.

In other words, by clerical error, the fourteen has been put in the wrong place. We understand there is no way to correct this "legislation by clerks," but we wish to ask

In view of the known fact that the extra $4,000 was given, after long argument in the Senate, for stream pollution and for extending disease prevention work, would it be lawful to use it for such purposes? Or, shall the purpose and intent of the law-making power be thwarted by the error of a clerk? Respectfully,

By order of the State Board of Health.

Secretary.

State of Indiana, Indianapolis,

May 8, 1907.

Dr. J. N. Hurty, Secretary of State Board of Health, Indianapolis, Indiana : Dear Sir-Your communication, on behalf of the State Board of Health, received, stating that

"The appropriation for this Board, page 680, Acts 1907, is in two parts. The first says ** * * for other expenses, such as office expenses, impure food, pollution of streams and preventing the spread of contagious and infectious diseases, the sum of ten thousand dollars.'

"The second says: 'For maintenance of laboratory of hygiene, purchase of food and drug samples, salaries of employes, transportation and hotel expenses of those necessary to conduct inspections, collect samples and attend prosecutions, and for incidental expenses, fourteen thousand dollars.'"

You ask: "Will it be lawful to use any of the $14,000.00 for pure food work, if the appropriation of the pure food act runs out, and it is to spare?”

Section 7 of the pure foods and drugs act (Acts 1907, p. 158) makes it the duty of the State Board of Health to enforce the laws of the State governing food and drug adulteration, and designates the chemist of such Board as a State food and drug commissioner; and $15,000 is appropriated annually by section 8 of the act, "To be expended by the State Board of Health for the purpose of meeting expenses incurred in the enforcement of this act, including the salaries of the State food and drug commissioner, chemists, inspectors and clerks, the cost of collection of samples, purchase of laboratory supplies, aid in prosecuting offenders against this act, publication and distribution of bulletins, and other expenses incident to the enforcement of this law."

The appropriation act of 1907 (Acts 1907, p. 680) appropriates certain money to pay the salaries of the secretary of the State Board of Health and other officers, and to pay the expenses of the members of the Board in attending the quarterly meetings of the Board, and "for other expenses, such as office expenses, impure food, pollution of streams and preventing the spread of contagious and infectious diseases, the sum of ten thousand dollars"; and again, "for maintenance of laboratory of hygiene, purchase of food and drug samples, salaries of employes, transportation and hotel expenses of those necessary to conduct inspections, collect samples and attend prosecutions, and for the incidental expenses, fourteen thousand dollars.”

Appropriations can only be used for the purposes intended by the legislature, and the intention of that body is to be gathered from the language used by it. This intention seems to have been clearly expressed and was to the effect that fourteen thousand dollars was appropriated for maintenance of laboratory of hygiene, etc., and it is my opinion that no part of it can be used by your department to prevent the pollution of streams or the spread of contagious and infectious diseases.

You state that "by clerical error, the fourteen has been put in the wrong place," that it should have been in place of "ten" in the forepart of the act, and that the "ten" should have been in place of the word "four

teen" in the latter part of the act. Whether there was a mistake in the enrollment or printing of the bill can make no difference now, since our courts hold-and correctly so, I think-that where a statute is duly authenticated by the presiding officers of the legislature, the court will not inquire as to the regularity of the proceedings before that time.

Evans v. Browne, 30 Ind. 514.

Since section 8 of the acts of 1907 (Acts 1907, p. 158), known as the pure foods and drugs act, appropriates $15,000 to be used by your department for some of the same purposes for which the $14,000 appropriation above shown is to be used, it is my opinion should said $15,000 so appropriated be inadequate for the purposes intended, such portion of the $14,000 appropriation as you may have to spare, if any, may be lawfully used by your department for pure food work as contemplated by the second appropriation for the State Board of Health (Acts 1907, p. 680). Yours very truly,

I have the honor to be,

JAMES BINGHAM,
Attorney-General.

NOTICE CONCERNING CLEANLY HANDLING OF FOODS AND
CONFECTIONS.

The rule of the Board passed April 10th, 1907, regarding the cleanly handling of foods, was promulgated by sending the following notice to persons interested in all parts of the state :

NOTICE TO MANUFACTURERS, DEALERS, VENDERS AND OTHER PERSONS ENGAGED IN THE SALE OF FOOD.

In accordance with a rule of the State Board of Health, made by them on the 10th day of April, 1907, relative to the sale of unprotected food products, and reading as follows:

Rule.-"No manufacturer, dealer, vender or other person shall expose for sale or exchange, or sell any bread, pastry, confectionery, shelled nuts, or other food so prepared that it is ready for consumption, unless such food is properly protected from insects, dust, dirt and other foreign or unwholesame material by suitable coverings."

Therefore, you are hereby notified to refrain from selling bread, pastry, confectionery, shelled nuts or other food prepared for consumption unless such food is properly protected from dust, dirt and other foreign or unwholesome material by suitable coverings of glass, wood or metal.

The violation of this order is punishable by a fine of ten dollars ($10.00). H. E. BARNARD,

State Food and Drug Commissioner.

SECRETARY'S REPORT FOR THE CALENDAR QUARTER ENDING

JUNE 30TH.

Kirklin Schoolhouse-A delegation of three citizens from Kirklin was present to request that the condemnation of the Kirklin schoolhouse be reconsidered, and that permission be given to make repairs. It was represented it would be impossible to build a new building by the time for opening school this fall, and also that the present building could be repaired and almost all sanitary requirements be met.

After argument was heard and many questions asked by different members of the Board, the following motion was made by Dr. Davis:

Moved, That the secretary make a second sanitary survey of the Kirklin schoolhouse, inquire into all the facts, and, in accordance with his judgment, act for and in the name of the Board. Carried.

Colfax Schoolhouse-Mr. Burr Bailey, trustee of Berry township, Clinton County, in regard to the Colfax schoolhouse, recently condemned, said in a letter to the secretary that: "A new site had been purchased, that the contract for a new building had been let, but it could not be completed before January 1st. He, therefore, requested a permit be given to use the old building until January 1st, 1907, or until the new building could be occupied. After discussion, Dr. Davis moved a reconsideration of the proclamation of condemnation. Carried.

Dr. Davis then moved the adoption of the following:

PROCLAMATION OF AMENDMENT.

The Indiana State Board of Health, in regular session, July 12, 1907, amends the proclamation of condemnation of the Colfax schoolhouse, adopted April 10, 1907, as follows, to wit:

The words "June 1st, 1907," the date after which the said proclamation forbids the use of the said schoolhouse for school purposes, are repealed, and the words, "January 1st, 1908," adopted.

Motion was unanimously adopted.

Ordered, The secretary shall duly serve the proclamation of amendment.