to the demand; the higher rate of remuneration is the incentive, the magnet that is sure to attract. State-aided emigration must interfere with, if it did not ultimately supersede, voluntary effort. At present 100 men have made up their minds to go, anti they work hard and save, or get help from friends or relations, and go. But if the State are going to help, say, twenty out of every hundred, naturally the other eighty will be tempted to wait their turn, and not practise self-denial or borrow from friends, if the State is to help them. To get rid of a certain number, and thereby discourage others, seems a measure of very doubtful benefit. We have tried the experiment before, and it was not successful. In 1869 and 1870 there were the same complaints as now of competition in the labour market. London is a refuge for the destitute; we want to limit the supply, not to encourage it, by giving an impression that the State is to aid in sending elsewhere, at the cost of the ratepayers, those who cannot find employment here. To ship off some would serve chiefly to draw fresh successors as needy and as helpless as their predecessors. It may be said that it would be cheaper to send our surplus labourers abroad at the expense of the State, than to maintain them in idleness at home; but it has been tried, and the result of sending away what this country can best spare, but what the receiving country has no occupation for, is simply to have them back upon our hands, more utterly helpless and hopeless than before. It would be impossible by State aid to scud out sufficient, beyond the present numbers that leave by voluntary