nearly so populous as the Melbourne suburbs.

ADELAIDE.

I began with a comparison between Melbourne and Sydney, towns of 280,000
and 220,000 inhabitants respectively. The capital of South Australia,
Adelaide, with its 70,000, stands, of course, upon an entirely different
level; but it possesses, to an even greater degree than Sydney, all the
peculiar characteristics of a capital city. If any comparison can be made
between Adelaide and its sister capitals, it is with Melbourne rather
than with Sydney. Adelaide is a thoroughly modern town, with all the
merits and all the defects attaching to novelty. It does not possess the
spirit of enterprise to so adventurous a degree as Melbourne, but neither
does it approach to the languor of Sydney. In this respect it has
discovered a very happy middle course. There is certainly something very
provincial about the attitude of the town towards the rest of the world,
but this helps to make it the more distinctive, and conduces largely to
its progress. It 'goes without saying' that there cannot be the same
number of large buildings as in the larger cities, that their proportions
cannot be so large, that there cannot be the same facilities for business
or for pleasure. But the emulation produced by the achievements of its
big neighbours has resulted in making Adelaide a far more advanced town
for its size than either of them. Proportionately to population,
everything in Adelaide ought theoretically to be on a fourth scale of its
like in Melbourne. As a matter of fact, most things are on more than
half-scale, many on a two-thirds, and a few things, such as the Botanic
Garden, the Exchange, the Banks of South Australia and Adelaide, are
unsurpassed.

For its size, I consider Adelaide the beet-built town I know, and