Reverberatory Furnace { 1901 131 11 8·3 { 1902 111 4 3·6 Blast Furnace { 1901 152 47 30·9 { 1902 187 21 11·1 Cupelling Furnace { 1901 12 1 8·3 { 1902 12 1 8·3 De-silverising { 1901 32 10 31·2 { 1902 34 7 20·6 Other Employment { 1901 300 7 2·3 { 1902 350 2 0·6 In one smelting works the percentage attack rate was 17·8 in 1901, and 27·1 in 1902. Here the number of workers had increased from 73 in 1901 to 129 in 1902, and the absolute and relative increase probably has relation to the well-known fact that newly employed untrained workers become affected. Similar incidence according to process can be given for the Friedrich’s smelting works during the years 1903-1905: Process. Year. No. Employed. Cases. Per Cent. Reverberatory Furnace { 1903 86 12 13·9 { 1904 87 8 9·2 { 1905 83 11 13·3 Blast Furnace { 1903 267 59 22·1 { 1904 232 24 10·3 { 1905 247 27 10·9 De-silverising { 1903 56 12 21·4 { 1904 73 4 5·5 { 1905 75 4 5·3 Cupelling { 1903 16 4 25·0 { 1904 15 1 6·7 { 1905 14 1 7·1 Other Employment { 1903 330 5 1·5 { 1904 309 4 1·3 { 1905 347 7 2·0 Among 3028 cases of lead poisoning treated between 1853 and 1882 in smelting works near Freiberg (Saxony) gastric symptoms were present in 1541, rheumatic pains in 215, cerebral symptoms in 144, paralysis in 58, and lead colic in 426. The recent reports of the German factory inspectors point still to rather high incidence in many lead smelting works. Thus in the district of Aix la Chapelle in 1909 there were sixty cases involving 1047 sick days, as compared with 58 and 878 in 1908. In a well-arranged smelting works near Wiesbaden fifty-two and forty-two cases were reported in 1908 and 1909 respectively, among about 400 persons employed. This relatively high number was believed to be closely connected with frequent change in the _personnel_. Introduction of the Huntingdon-Heberlein method is thought to have exercised an unfavourable influence.