enjoining women to abjure the use of veils and part with their pet
dogs as a war measure; but they said not a word about the continuance
of the liquor business which rears its head in every street and has
wasted three million tons of grain since the war began. What wonder is
it that these childish appeals to the women to economize fall on deaf
or indignant ears! Women have a nasty way of making comparisons. They
were so much easier to manage before they learned to read and write.

The war wears on its weary course. The high cost of living becomes
more and more of a nightmare to the people, yet the British Government
tolerates a system which wastes more sugar than would feed the army,
impairs the efficiency of the working-man one sixth, and wastes two
million dollars every day in what is at best a questionable
indulgence, and at worst a national menace. Speaking of economy,
personal thrift, conservation, and other "win-the-war" plans, how
would the elimination of the liquor traffic do for a start?

There are two ways of practicing economy: one is by refusing to spend
money, which is not always a virtue; and the other is by increasing
production, which is the greatest need of this critical time. The
farmers are doing all they can: they are producing as much as they
have means and labor for. But still in Canada much land is idle, and
many people sit around wondering what they can do. There will be women
sitting on verandas in the cities and towns in the summer, knitting
socks, or maybe crocheting edges on handkerchiefs, who would gladly be
raising potatoes and chickens if they knew how to begin; and a
corresponding number of chickens and potatoes will go unraised. But
the idea of coöperation is taking root, and here and there there is a
breaking away from the conventional mode of life. The best thing about
it is that people are thinking, and pretty soon the impact of public