395 
is the large numbers of milks sold in Washington containing 
measurable amounts of dirt. Two hundred and forty-two samples 
out of 452, or 53.5 per cent of all the samples examined, contained 
0.07 per cent, or more, of dirt by volume of the milk. Many 
more of the samples contained traces of dirt, and comparatively 
few were absolutely clean. During the summer of 1906, of 172 
samples of milk examined in the Division of Pathology and Bacteri- 
ology of the Hygienic Laboratory, 98 samples were found to contain 
a very small amount of dirt. Eight contained much dirt, and 1 
contained (mouse?) feces. (See Bulletin 35, Hygienic Laboratory, 
United States Public Health and Marine-Hospital Service, p. 71.) 
All sanitarians are agreed that milk should contain no dirt, and 
by the use of the Gurler milk pail in milking, and by taking a 
few simple precautions in the handling and preservation- of milk 
it can certainly be kept out, and a good clean milk delivered to the 
consumer. 
The presence of dirt in such a large percentage of the samples 
examined indicates an alarming neglect of even the simplest precau- 
tions, and probably accounts for the large number of bacteria found 
in the greater number of milks on sale in the city of Washington 
during the summer months. According to Renk (quoted byOtt (5)), 
cow’s milk should be put on the market in such a state of purity that 
after two hours’ standing a liter of the milk should show no appreciable 
deposit. Very few of the milks offered for sale in this city would 
conform to this requirement. 
It should be observed in this connection, however, that dirty milk 
is by no means confined to this locality. Nearly every city through- 
out the world has to contend with this problem. According to some 
authorities, the citizens of Berlin consume 300 pounds of cow dung 
in their milk daily, and the citizens of New York consume 10 tons of 
filth and refuse in the same manner; and many medical authorities, 
among them Winslow (16), assert that the question of dirt and the 
bacterial contamination of milk is of infinitely greater importance 
from the standpoint of health than a high chemical standard gov- 
erning the composition of milk, for the reason that very poor milk, 
viz, that which is low in proteids, fat, and milk sugar, is still very 
valuable as a food and contains a great deal of nutriment, provided 
that it is sufficiently clean to be consumed with safety. On the other 
hand, it is now perfectly well understood that dirty milk and milk bac- 
terially contaminated is not only responsible for the high death rate 
prevailing among young children from cholera infantum, but that 
polluted milk is also responsible to a large degree for the spread of 
such infections as diphtheria, scarlet fever, typhoid fever, and tuber- 
