We propose to begin with the mission station and to set down the information which we need, in order that we may take an intelligent interest in the work at the station, viewed by itself, as progress is made towards the immediate object of its existence; and then we propose to look at it in relation to other stations in the province or country, both comparatively to see how they differ, and as parts of a whole, to see what is the position of the Church in the province or country, and what place each station occupies in the work done in the larger whole.

When we look at the mission station viewed by itself, the first question which we ask is:  Has the station any defined area, district, or parish, connected with it in which it is the business of the missionaries to preach the Gospel and establish the Church?  If the answer to that question is, “Yes, it has,” and that answer would very commonly be given, then at once we get our feet on firm ground.  We can start our survey on a territorial basis; and with a common territorial basis we can immediately compare the work of one station with that done at another station.  We have further a terminus ad quem, and in our survey we can tell whether progress is in that direction and how rapid it is.

We can do this, because the definition of a parish or district implies the recognition on the part of those who define the parish or district, of the purpose, if not the duty, of preaching the Gospel and establishing the Church in the area of that parish or district.  The mere definition of the area, therefore, implies a policy for the mission which defines the area and for the station for which the area is defined.  For such a station, therefore, we design our first survey, the object of the survey being to discover how far the work of the station is succeeding in performing the task which it obviously undertook when it accepted the definition of area.

1.  We begin then by surveying the position of the work in the station district extensively:  we ask—­What is the relation between the work done and the work remaining to be done?  We ask this question in two forms; first, in terms of the cities, towns, and villages which lie in the station area, and secondly, in terms of population.  We ask the question in this double form because we believe that by this means the surveyor will obtain a clear view of the situation and will be able easily to see what has been done in relation to the work yet to be done, and it is the relation of those two that is most illuminating.  If these tables were constantly revised the progress of the work could be traced from year to year easily and helpfully.  Put side by side they illuminate each other, and each affords a check upon the other.  Progress in numbers in proportion to population and progress in the number of places occupied should often properly advance side by side.  Progress in numbers in proportion to population without any increase in the number of places occupied may often occur; progress in the number of places occupied without a corresponding increase of the Christian population in proportion to the non-Christian population may also occur, and each must give the missionary food for thought.  The tables are simple, dealing with bare numerical proportions:—­