the change has added not a little to the wisdom and moderation of its counsels, and the weight and influence of its decisions. Mr. Alexander Clark, the secretary of the council, in whose opinion on the subject the author places great reliance, assures him that during the last twenty years he has observed a marked improvement in the drinking habits of most of the trades. Another circumstance which shows the desire for improvement of the respectable working classes is, that they are all (not only the teetotallers) anxious to see the facilities for obtaining drink curtailed. In the year 1872, a committee of gentlemen, with whom the author co-operated, invited the opinion of the skilled artisans of Liverpool on the question of the hours which should be allowed for the sale of drink, and the result was as follows:[307]— Returns were made freely, and without influence being in any way exercised upon them, by 8096 men. Of these, the number in favour of opening public-houses at 6 A.M. on week-days was 1586, or less than one-fifth. At 7 A.M., 6505, or more than four-fifths. Of closing at 11 P.M., 1724, or about one-fifth. Of closing at 10 P.M., 6372, or about four-fifths. And a canvass, which was subsequently made by the temperance organisations, showed that an immense majority of the whole community favoured the total closing of public-houses on Sunday. This, it must be remembered, was in a town which has the reputation, and justly so, of being one of the most drink-ridden in the whole country! What refers to the working classes of Liverpool may, however, be safely said concerning those of other large towns. It is still too early to express a decided opinion upon the changes which are taking place in the drinking habits of our agricultural labourers. In a letter to the author, their leader, Mr. Joseph Arch, says that “having had the opportunity of making inquiries respecting the increase of drunkenness in rural villages consequent upon the advance of wages,” the answer he has received from nine out of every ten has been that there is less intemperance and less disturbance, and many publicans, he says, have complained to him that, although some of the branches of the Agricultural Labourers’ Union meet at their houses, the men spend less money now than they did formerly. Mr. Arch adds, that the reason of their meeting in public-houses at all is because the clergy deny them the use of the village schoolrooms! When the franchise is given to those men, who are as well entitled to it as one half, at least, of those who possess it already, all this will be changed. There will be as great anxiety to conciliate the “voters,” as there is now on the part of many of the less enlightened clergy and squirearchy to suppress the combinations formed for the purpose of ameliorating their condition.[308]