lo Sept.. 1909.] TJie T.ady Talbot Milk Iiistiiiitc. 553 



■with the good work it has done in tliis its first year, and there are many 

 motliers who would tell one that they ow^e their babies' lives to Talbot 

 Milk. Next year I am convinced that the applications for the milk will 

 be at least doubled, and the 'good work of the Institute far more widely 

 spread ; and surely this should be so. 



I know the expenses are very heavy, but I cannot help feeling that if 

 a subscription list were opened the public would nobly respond ; not onlv 

 would the wealthy send their cheques, but, was it widely enough known 

 that the money was needed, the poorer classes would send in their shillings 

 and half-crowns in great numbers. Again, I think no milk should be 

 delivered absolutely free of charge — e\-en if only a halfpenn\ a week 

 could be afforded I think that halfpenny should be paid. I say this with 

 all earnestness, simply from what I have obser\'ed during these months. 



While s]jeaking on the monev question, I would like to sav, on a strictlv 

 impersonal basis, that I think it would be the very greatest mistake for 

 the nurses who visit the children to be in any way connected ^\ith the; 

 selling of the coupons or the taking of the money. Once let the people 

 think the nurses go for any reason other than to sympathize and look 

 after the welfare of the baby, and to mv mind every shred of influence 

 they may have will be irrevocably lost, and the cry will be changed from 

 " Here comes Nurse to see Baby !" to " Here comes the woman for the 

 milk money !" and one can hardly expect these poor overworked mothers 

 to take counsel and advice from " the woman who comes for the money." 

 I would like to say a few words as to the way in -which I have been 

 received at the many and various homes I have visited. In no case have 

 I met with anything but courtesy, and I must admit that this was a sur- 

 prise to me. I expected to be " tolerated," and found that in most cases 

 I was welcomed and eagerly looked for, and in several cases where the 

 babies have been seriously ill I cannot sav enough in praise for the con- 

 stant and dev^oted nursing they have received from their parents. All I 

 have to say in conclusion is : May the L.T.M. Institute increase its good 

 work each year, and prosper exceedingly. 



Briseis Belstead. 



No. II. 



It is now just four months since I first started visiting the babies fed 

 on the L.T. Milk in the districts of Richmond, Prahran, and South Mel- 

 bourne. In all I have had in my care 120 babies. 



Of these two died in Richmond. One had been on the milk for 

 twenty-four* hours onh-, and was very emaciated with marasnnis. The 

 ■other baby had the L.T. Milk for one week. He had been ill for weeks 

 with bowel trouble, and could not take any food. Even the L.T. Milk 

 did not agree with him. He was put back to whev and brandy, and died 

 a few weeks later. 



Three in South Melbourne — one from neglect ; just skin and bone when 

 we first found her. One from heart failure — a miserable little thing, on 

 the L.T. Milk nine days; and one baby who- was having the L.T. 

 Milk for eleven days, aged three weeks. The babies who have been fed 

 on L.T. Milk exclusively under eight months of age, show the greatest 

 improvement of all. One child in Prahran, fed on the L.T. Milk pure, 

 and an occasional rusk, gained 8| lbs. in four months. 



* In estimating the number of cases supplied, and the deaths, those children who 

 have not been on the Institute Milk for at least 7 days have not been counted. 



