22

As compared with the number of children under one year given in the
Census Report for 1872, viz. 16,781, the number of registered births for the
past year, viz. 9,031, seems small. It may be that in the Census Returns the
Jaghirs are included, in which case the great difference in the numbers will be
somewhat explained. But apart from this, I have frequently had brought up for
vaccination in Chhindwara, children whose births are not noted in the Register
of births kept up at the Dispensary; and if at Chhindwara births are not fully
registered, it is equally certain that the same thing happens in other large towns
of the district, more especially among the wealthier class of Sahocars and land-
owners. In small villages I have seldom found any discrepancy in the numbers
vaccinated and the numbers proved to have been born during the year.

Assuming that the Census figures are correct, they give 53 births per
1,000 of population. while the district number of births is only 28 per 1,000 ; that
is, dividing the number of births registered (exclusive of Jaghirs) by the total
population of the district inclusive of Jaghirs. If, however, the number of births
in the Jaghirs could be ascertained, there would, I think, be an increase of about
8 per 1,000, making the total birth rate to about 36 per 1,000 of population.

In the Annual Report of the Sanitary Commissioner for 1870, the birth
rate in England is stated to be 35.85 per 1,000, while in Durham it reached as
high as 41.81 per 1,000 living, so that registration in this district may be consi-
dered very fair, although still rather below the average of what might reasonably
be expected.

The total number vaccinated (primary) in reference to Caste Statement
No. I. shows the following results : —

or, in other words, Christians show the least, while the wild Gonds show best of
all. This may be explained by the fact that nearly all the Christian children
have already been vaccinated.

Or 2 annas ½ pie for each successful cases (primary and secondary.)