the roster for the coming year, instead of a big book of transactions. That is about all the general man cares for—to know what has happened and he can read the pages and discussions in the medical journals, the same as is done in the case of the American Medical Association. Michigan, California, Kentucky, Massachusetts and other states have no transactions at the present time, and I think it would meet with very much approval if some one would make a motion following the suggestion I have made.

DR. BURNSIDE FOSTER: I think Dr. McDavitt's suggestion an excellent one. It took the library of the Ramsey County Medical Society five years to get a consecutive lot of transactions. I would like to move that it is the sense of the association that the councilors publish in the transactions a list of officers, a roster of members and, if deemed advisable, the new constitution and by-laws, and also the list of papers as published in the journals.

DR. H. B. SWEETZER: I believe it would be a mistake to give up the transactions in book form. I think a great many of us read the book more than some of you think we do. I have a complete list of volumes since I have been a member of the association and have read them with profit. I take great satisfaction in sometimes looking over a volume of ten or twelve years ago to compare the opinion of members on a certain subject with the opinions of the same subject as they express them to-day. It is not a fact that the American Medical Association does not publish its transactions in book form. It is true it does not publish them as a whole organization, but they are published by the various sections, and you can get anything you want very much better than by going through a large volume. I have The Journal of the American Medical Association bound and it is difficult to find what you want, but in the transactions of the sections you can find exactly what you want, and if we adopt this resolution it will only be a year or two before we will want to go back to the old form of transactions, and I do not think we would care to have a break in the continuity of the transactions. As regards the expense, what do we want with the

money in the treasury anyway? It seems to me this is the way we want to spend our money. We have no other use for it that I can see. We meet here to transact the business of the association and to discuss various scientific subjects. The papers that are read here are not listened to by a great number of people and they would rather read them and study them at their leisure if they are published in one volume. Now, you find some papers in the St. Paul Medical Journal and some in the Northwestern Lancet, and if you do not have them bound and try to look up something on a special subject the chances are that you will not find what you are looking for. I have some of my magazines bound, but some of them become mislaid and I have to send to the publishers for some of the numbers I have lost. I think, therefore, it would be better to continue our transactions the same as we are doing at present.

journals in

DR. BURNSIDE FOSTER: I appreciate the arguments Dr. Sweetzer has advanced, but it seems to me with the multiplicity of libraries and medical journals, and with the indexes that are furnished, that any man who wants to get access to any papers that have been read anywhere can very easily do so. Our volume of transactions is not indexed, and it is necessary to go through the whole book to find a particular paper. With the complete index of the the libraries anything may very easily be found. The money we have in the treasury is going to be needed. There are a great many expenses to be met until the new plan of organization is thoroughly under way, and I do not think we want to from six to eight hundred dollars a year unless pense. The volume will also be more exshall need more copies. We shall soon need will double or treble the expense, so I move of wisdom as well as economy to f the transactions.

aw

hardly think we have reached the time. to give up the transactions of the state tly I will move as an amendment to the se that the councilors be instructed to

publish the book of transactions of the state association this year as usual.

The motion as amended was put to a vote and prevailed.

A motion by Dr. T. J. Catlin that the councilors be instructed to furnish an index to the transactions since the beginning of publication was lost.

On motion of Dr. H. B. Sweetzer the association adjourned sine die.

THE ORGANIZED MEDICAL PROFESSION.

J. W. ANDREWS, M.D., MANKATO.

Ladies and Gentlemen:-Having been called by your suffrage to preside over this honorable and distinguished body of physicians and surgeons, the highest honor that can be conferred by the medical profession of the state on one of its members, it is with pleasure and deep gratitude that I take this opportunity to thank you for the honor, and to pledge you my most earnest effort to assist in making this state meeting one of profit and interest.

I have nothing new, startling or original to offer you in my address. I present to you in a few simple words that which has been uppermost in the minds of the medical profession of the United States, the last three years, viz., the reorganization of the medical profession.

At the St. Paul meeting, held in June, 1901, your honored president, Dr. William Davis, delivered an address entitled "The Organization of the Medical Profession," in which he very forcibly and beautifully set forth the advantages to be gained by organizing the medical profession along the line soon to be presented to the American Medical Association, for its adoption.

At the Minneapolis meeting, held in June, 1902, your distinguished president, Dr. William Asbery Hall, gave an address to the association entitled "Organization of the Medical Profession; Its Aims and Benefits." At the time of this very able address, full of valuable advice and suggestions, the organization of the profession had had a year's growth. Two years had elapsed since its conception, and one year since its birth by the American Medical Association, in the Saintly City down the river, and now, fellow physicians, it gives me pleasure beyond that which I can express, to be permitted to address you on the "Organized Medical Profession.”

ST. PAUL MEETING.

Another year has elapsed, and the development of reorganization has been simply marvelous. The organization is not yet complete, far from it, but the foundation was well laid, and the superstructure has already assumed magnificent proportions, and now awaits the finishing touches and the ornamentations.

Let us pass out into the future, and as the watchman on the tower hails with delight the aurora of the rising sun, so we shall hail with unbounded joy a magnificently organized medical profession of the United States ere the Twentieth Century shall have passed her babyhood. Thanks to the untiring, unselfish and self-sacrificing efforts of J. N. McCormack, P. Maxwell Foshay and George H. Simmons. It was they that conceived the present unique scheme of organization, and largely by their efforts it was brought forth and given to the profession. By them it has been nourished, cared for, and loved, as a mother would nourish, love and care for her new-born babe. Their names will be inscribed on tablets immortal, and future generations will rise up to bless their

memory.

At the St. Paul meeting of the American Medical Association resolutions were adopted, an epitome of which is as follows:

1. Federation of all the state and territorial associations with the American Medical Association.

2. That all associations adopt a uniform plan of organization, as regards certain fundamental principles.

3. That each state association have two distinct branches, legislative and scientific.

4. That the legislative branch be as small as compatible with representation from all county societies in the state or territory.

5. That the scientific branch be composed of and open to all members of the county societies.

6. That membership in the county society shall be ipso facto membership in the state association.