Society. I have filled them up, with imaginary entries, to show their use in practice. Form No. 22 is a reduced copy of the Form on which the statement of the Applicant is taken down. The other papers relating to the case are afterwards attached to it, as described at p. 44.

Reader.-And Form No. 20 appears to be that so often referred to in Chapter IV. But do you really suppose that people will read all this technical detail?

Author. Those who are engaged in the practical work of charity will do so, I hope. Others may perhaps skip that particular chapter, though even of them some may come back to it after reading the rest.

Reader.—I have at present only slightly examined this volume; but some points obviously affront criticism. For example: your method seems to demand that applicants should give all their previous addresses, and all the names of their relations, employers and friends. Does not such a method stand self-condemned? Again: you leave to the Guardians a "decent old body," for no better reason than want of thrift, p. 53.

Author. Criticism based upon a slight examination is the only sort of criticism that I would venture to deprecate. If you are good enough to read this volume with care you will find, I think, the answers to your objections.

We do not require in all cases such an exhaustive statement of the history of applicants as you seem to imagine. On Form 22 the residences of the applicant are stated for a period of 16 years. That is because she has lived long in each place, and the

information is naturally and easily obtained. Usually it is enough to obtain previous addresses for about four years. But the fuller the history the better is the chance of affording real and ample assistance. No doubt it is a difficult art to obtain a full history without friction and offence; but the art is not more difficult than necessary to the charitable worker.

Reader. It is only workers in your society that seem to feel this necessity.

Author. I beg your pardon. We feel it perhaps more than others because we stand alone at present in endeavouring to obtain adequate relief; and it is only when you try to remove the causes of distress that you feel the need of knowing its history. But other Societies must and do inquire. Here, for example, is a case taken from the last Report of the Working Ladies' Guild,' a Society where the utmost delicacy is obviously and exceptionally necessary:

"No. 151.—A widow with five children. She is paralysed and epileptic. Her whole income 127. per annum. They have no relations who can help them in any way. The eldest boy has employment at 10s. per week, two younger boys are inmates of public schools, and a nomination is now sought for the youngest.'

You will see that the investigation has been searching, though certainly not more so than was needful.

We

Your other point is one often taken against us. are called hard and stern because we will give enough or nothing; because where it is impossible to obtain enough to do real good we refer the case to the Poor Law. In the instance you cite a pension would have been the

only form of charitable relief which would have removed the distress; and pensions are difficult to obtain, and would be mischievous if promiscuously given with no regard to thrift. It is only self-indulgent charity that is never stern.

Reader.-Does your book profess to be a complete treatise ?

Author.-No; rather suggestive than complete. I have tried to put charitable workers in the way of working, as I conceive, to the best purpose. Their own experience must guide them further. There is also a considerable amount of charitable literature already in existence, which I have only endeavoured to supplement. I may refer you especially to the 'Charity Organisation Papers,' Questions and Answers on Charity Organisation,' and 'The Charities' Register and Digest,' all published by the Charity Organisation Society, 15 Buckingham Street, W.C.

Reader. Well, sir, thorough investigation is your principle; and you shall not be condemned without it. Author.-I ask no better.