lar statements. No one familiar with precautions against errors in statistical work could have any confidence in the accuracy of the work that produced those tables.

It is a common observation in the use of statistical matter published by State bureaus of labor, boards of agriculture, other State offices, and, indeed, by some national offices, that there has been a failure to follow a safe course of procedure in office work and in verifying printed matter, and the published productions of college and university professors and students are far from being exempt from this characterization.

The observation of the writer has been that professors and graduate students of universities and colleges possess a mind trained to establish facts, but one almost without precautions to preserve facts in their transfer from the primary source to the stereotyped printed page. It is no attempt at exaggeration to say that a girl graduated from a high school not longer than one or two years previously can better be trusted to safeguard the transfer than they can.

A common sole reliance for the verification of a copy or of a proof is a reading back to the original. This proceeding is fraught with errors. While it is wise to read back to copy or to original to discover the bulk of the errors, a sole dependence upon this proceeding is sure to leave many errors undiscovered.

Such being the general situation, an excuse is offered for the presentation of a formulated description of precautions against error in the statement that follows. These are based upon the many years' experience of the writer and of other persons engaged in statistical work. They may be depended upon to eliminate error almost completely. The qualification “almost completely" is made because there are two or three sources of error which no prevision can avoid, namely: (1) the concerted dishonesty of workers; (2) compensating errors, as when a plus error is counterbalanced by a minus error,-a very rare occurrence, yet one which may and does occur; and (3) the repetition of an error in the same place by different persons working at different times and independently of each other. The last error is exceedingly rare, and yet it does occur. An instance

is called to mind in which a series of percentages were computed, all proving to 100 after justification. Three persons performed this work, the results of each being unknown to the others, and the results were the same in every particular; yet a fourth person repeating the operation discovered a common error which the preceding three had committed. An experience of this sort might not be repeated probably in a lifetime.

For the use of practical workers in statistics, whether in educational institutions or in government offices, who are relying solely upon their own work and upon reading copies and proofs back to originals, the following is offered:

Table-making:

RULES TO GOVERN WORK.

Table-making generally to be in duplicate when feasible; when not, the figures, additions, and computations to be verified by a second worker. When tables are made in duplicate or are to be copied, having columns without totals, the columns are to be added to get totals for "check" purposes.

In comparing duplicate tables, or in verifying a table, or in verifying a copy of a table or of text, do not erase a figure supposed to be wrong: use red ink to correct it above.

Use red ink for total lines.

Persons who do duplicate work, or first work and its verification, are not to confer with each other concerning differences nor to consult with each other before finishing work.

The initials of each person doing work should appear at an upper corner of the first sheet, together with a statement as to what work was done: thus, "Compiled," "Verified," "Compared," etc.

Making and verifying copies of tables:

Do not copy total lines; get totals by adding copy and compare with original.

If original has no total lines, add to get them for "check" purposes; also add the copy, and compare.

Read copy back to original before adding.

Text "copy":

To be verified from accompanying tables or from original sources.

A copy of this to be verified by at least one reading back and by procedure of preceding paragraph.

ces back to copy, and add. (Types will fall u neir proper places.)

sndicated on first page proof have been made.

foregoing are permissible for special and good ane importance of the work, the ability and honesty real difficulties that are encountered; but not at ne but the person in charge.

THE COST OF MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT IN
MASSACHUSETTS.

BY EDWARD M. HARTWELL.

The caption of this article is the chief title of Public Document No. 79, 1908, whose sub-title is "First Annual Report on the Comparative Financial Statistics of the Cities and Towns of Massachusetts, covering Municipal Fiscal Years ending between Nov. 30, 1906, and April 1, 1907, by the Chief of the Bureau of Statistics of Labor."

This is a noteworthy publication by reason of its significance as well as on account of its contents. It signalizes the opening of a new chapter in the official statistics of Massachusetts, and is indicative of the recognition by the legislature,-belated, to be sure, but still welcome, after four years of urging-of the need of a comprehensive, authoritative annual survey of the financial operations of the cities and towns of the Commonwealth, in addition to the statements of their debts, sinking funds, liabilities, and assets which have been published annually for many years by the Tax Commissioner.

This report makes it possible for the first time to obtain a clear view of the receipts and expenditures of each and all of the municipalities of the Commonwealth without engaging in the ungrateful task of attempting to reduce the reports of 33 cities and 321 towns to a uniform basis in order to extract comparable data.

It is true that at rare intervals incomplete statements of the expenditures of the municipalities of Massachusetts have appeared in public documents, but such statements have differed materially from one another in their scope and in the method of their presentation. Thus, in the report of the Metropolitan District Commission of 1896, certain classes of expenditure of

First galley proof of tables and text:

Read critically, and make thereon all superficial corrections.

Copy on retained proof or elsewhere for future use the "check" totals of tables of printer's copy.

First page proof of tables:

See that all corrections indicated on galley proof have been made.
Add columns to prove to total lines and to "check" totals.
Cross-add to total columns.

Make all computations that can be made from the proof.

First page proof of text:

See that all corrections indicated on galley proof have been made.
Make all computations that can be made from the proof.

Verify from accompanying tables and from printer's "copy."

Second page proof of tables and text:

Read last column of tables back to copy, and add. (Types will fall down and not get back to their proper places.)

See that all corrections indicated on first page proof have been made.

Departures from the foregoing are permissible for special and good reasons, depending on the importance of the work, the ability and honesty of clerks, and the practical difficulties that are encountered; but not at the discretion of any one but the person in charge.