another man and his work differs from the work of the other man: over
large areas it is often the work of one man among many which really
saves the situation. It is quite true. In the last resort survey becomes
survey of personalities. But in a survey of the kind which we propose,
survey of personalities is impossible and most undesirable.

The survey proposed cannot deal with personalities, but that does not
invalidate the importance of the information asked for. Such forms
received from many different stations would certainly throw light on the
serious question of reinforcement. It is of course obvious that
reinforcements could not be allotted rightly on such slight evidence as
the proportion of missionaries to the population of a district. The
question is not whether reinforcements could be allotted on this factor
alone; but whether they could be allotted rightly in ignorance of it.
Taken in conjunction with the preceding and following tables, this table
would reveal something that we may call _need_ in a purely quantitative
expression, and comparative need should certainly influence the
allotment of reinforcements. Though the statement of need in this table
is indeed utterly insufficient by itself, it is nevertheless true that
no statement of comparative need which ignored the proportions here set
out would be satisfactory. This quantitative expression is not
sufficient; but no statement is sufficient without it, and, as often, so
here, it is the proportion rather than the actual figures which make
comparison possible:--

---------------------------------------------------------------------
| | Total |Proportion |Proportion | Remarks
District.|Popula- | Foreign | to | of Women | and
| tion. |Missionaries.|Population.| to |Conclusions.
| | | |Population.|