this system becoming a preliminary to the establishment here of that continental arrangement whereby children are boarded out while both parents are at work? It may be necessary, in some families, that the mother should go out to work; but it hardly appears unreasonable to gauge a nation's prosperity as being in inverse ratio to the percentage of women who work for employers other than their husbands.

During the war, too, we have seen an alarming increase of the practice of whisking away children born out of wedlock. Here the philanthropists, in their natural zeal for the children's well-being, are doing grave injury to adults. Wrong-doing is thus shorn of some of its natural punishment in the present, and to a certain extent encouraged for the future. It is with the more remote future also that we are interfering. The sanctity of womanhood is tarnished under the system. Doubt and hesitation will creep in where there may be no reason for misgiving; or facts may come to light, and tragedies will supervene. Philanthropy should concern itself more seriously with drinking women. Usually a person arrested for drunkenness is liberated just as the craving is upon him, when in fact he is most likely to restart the vicious cycle. Medical care at such times might accomplish wonders.

It has been contended by many people that the conditions indicated above would prove to be merely temporary, that with the cessation of hostilities we should find women reverting to their pre-war attitude towards drink, and that the increase in female intemperance complained of would disappear. Here, as in most other cases, where it is necessary to bring a sordid charge, one finds counsel for the defence relying upon more lines of argument than one. 'The allegations,' we are told, are untrue; or, if true, the return to normal conditions will soon put a stop to the increased drinking complained of. When the women are earning less, and when the men return, things will right themselves.' But in the majority of cases the abnormally high earnings of women ceased almost a year ago, while the greater number of the men were back months since and others are returning daily; but the improvement, or reversion to the better conditions of pre-war days is still

to seek. Moreover, the tendency to increased drinking among women was only too well marked before the war. War conditions have done no more than accele

rate the pace.

There is something wilful, if not definitely perverse, about these optimists; even when shown facts, they exhibit the blindness of persons determined not to see. But take a journey on 'bus or tram with such a man. From that post of observation it is easy to note the general constitution of crowds which fill public-houses. Or take him to a busy restaurant. Almost invariably one can see the waitresses taking alcoholic refreshment in the intervals of service; while among the customers it is usual to find that very few of the gentler sex are teetotallers, though nowadays a surprising number of men are. Not infrequently one may observe three men and one woman at a table where alcoholic drink is served to the woman only. Admittedly there may be no harm in this, but it is symptomatic; while worse, more sadly defined, cases are to be met with, for the custom has grown up among women and girls of the more educated class of entering restaurants ostensibly for a meal but in reality to sit at luncheon-tables and take only liquid refreshment. Recently the head of a large restaurant told an inquirer that nowadays girls of less than twenty come here and order wines with all the assurance in the world.' Whether we conclude that it has been war conditions in general or the No-Treating Order' in particular, it is impossible to dispute the fact that the habit of ordering drink for themselves is now firmly established among women. There is every reason to fear that such a habit, once acquired, will not be easily abandoned; and experience seems to show that women who have acquired it are less easily cured than men.

Within the past few weeks magistrates have frequently refused to grant summonses for assault to working-class women against their neighbours, though it has been asserted from the Bench more than once that such quarrels are becoming common. As a rule, they are the result of drink. In September 1919 a highly aristocratic journal had a paragraph headed The Modern Woman,' in which some detail was given concerning the holding-up of no less than four motor 'buses

by an inebriated female. Twice recently the present writer has been on a tram which carried parties of young men and women of the working class, when the language of the by no means sober young women was so bad that even their half-drunken male companions endeavoured to check them. We are, of course, told that it is not possible to make people sober by Act of Parliament. It is equally true that murder cannot be stamped out by legislation. But, if no real effort were made to put the law concerning homicide into effect, should we not have a greater number of murders? Yet a woman may make it abundantly clear to every one who sees her that she is intoxicated, and no arrest will follow. Is the law content to insist that lethal weapons shall only be sold between certain hours and that they shall conform to certain standards of quality and bulk? The fact is that vested interest and the sin of avarice in high places doom thousands of well-conducted men and women to lead lives of hopeless misery. So long as profit can be made out of men and women who drink, they must not be prevented from so doing. But this means that the liberty of each subject involves the slavery of others.

In conclusion, the Liquor Control Board claims to have reduced intemperance among women of the working class, and in support of its contention points to its array of figures touching the arrests of women for drunkenness. These figures make no allowance for the thousands of women who have left England, the reduced number of police to make arrests, or the fact that now intoxicated or partially intoxicated women do not go about singly as heretofore, but are generally to be seen in groups. These are but some of the reasons which may be given in support of the contention that the Board's figures are no accurate index of the growth or decline of female intemperance. Occasional reference is made in the Reports to the fact that working-class children present a better appearance than formerly. Gladly admitting the truth of this, one may yet ask if it be inconceivable that the woman who is taking to drink should also spend more money on her children. In speaking of the children, too, the majority is meant; our contention is that that minority of women who drink is growing.

Most of those persons who support the Board's

contention do so because of curtailment of supply, enhanced prices and shortening of hours. Reasons at least as many and as cogent can be advanced for a tendency to excessive drinking when and where possible. Moreover, we see again confusion between majority and minority in this line of argument. If the majority who never were excessive drinkers hold aloof now, as for many reasons the best of them do, the supply available for the more thoughtless, together with the temptation to the publican to sell it, is thereby increased. years ago, the drinking minority, with limited means, fewer inducements, and more dependence, were unlikely to obtain as much as they can get to-day with more money, more inducements, and a new feeling of independence.

A few

Of what use is the compilation of figures or the continuing of argument when it is easy for any one who would know to look around and see? The Salvation Army sees, the Church Army sees, the Young Women's Christian Association sees. Members of the medical profession who are not themselves abstainers see. Ministers of religion who are in populous districts almost invariably see. But as a rule the Government official does not see. All honour to the one or two Chief Constables and the few publicans who, seeing, have not hesitated to speak and to act. The Liquor Control Board continues to claim success as the result of its methods up to the end of October 1918; yet, in the second week of November following, we read of arrangements being made for increased supply of alcoholic liquors and reduction of price, together with the brewing of stronger beer. We may well ask, Why?

A SKILLED LABOURER.

Art. 8.-ROAD TRAFFIC IN GREAT CITIES.

run.

THERE are reasons why the problems associated with the organisation of road traffic must always differ from, and be in some respects more complex than, those connected with the conduct of Railway Companies or with Marine or Aerial Services. The two latter do not require any continuous prepared route upon which to In the case of the railway, the prepared route is the property of those who own and organise the working of the rolling stock, and this rolling stock has a monopoly of the permanent way. In the case of road transport, the vehicle has no monopoly of the prepared way, which is not the property of the vehicle owner. Consequently we have almost invariably an open conflict of interests. On the one side are those responsible for the maintenance and improvement of roads; on the other are those whose interests are identified primarily with the provision of economical means of transport. Evidently it does not follow that the systems of transport calculated to do the least possible injury to the roads are also the systems calculated to give the greatest economy and efficiency of haulage. In the case of a Railway Company, we have the department responsible for the permanent way and various departments responsible for the maintenance of rolling stock and the provision of services. All these are co-ordinated by one central management capable of appreciating the fact that an increase in the cost of maintaining the permanent way would be justifiable if it were accompanied by a still greater decrease in the cost of doing the requisite transport work.

How different a state of affairs has hitherto existed in respect of road traffic may be illustrated by a very brief quotation from the recently published report of the Departmental Committee set up by the Local Government Board to consider the laws and regulations relating to the construction and use of modern road vehicles :In our deliberations we have endeavoured to keep before us the sole consideration of the damage to the roads.' The Committee thus deliberately prefaces its conclusions by a bald statement to the effect that it has considered a broad question from a narrow standpoint. It would be just as reasonable for railway organisation