sympathetic attitude towards it, and to express in their own organizations their readiness to adapt themselves to meet its ideals. If they are to do this with confidence, what greater stimulus could they have than the knowledge, which few outside our borders possess, I fear, of the uniform experience of our Society throughout its history? _The Church needs to realize with greater vividness how much the consecrated womanhood in her midst can contribute to her life, and to give women the fullest opportunity to make that contribution._ VIII. If the women’s movement expresses, as it undoubtedly does, a spiritual aspiration, I think the same may be said with perhaps equal force of the labor movements in Western countries. That many working-men have been practically unable to develop the higher side of their nature, on account of the conditions of labor, is generally admitted. The movement for higher wages and better conditions of work is, after all, something more than the expression of a grievance against capital. There is the deep yearning for a fuller life. This great aspiration the Churches should recognize and seek to meet. Speaking for my own country, I can say that one of the great obstacles with which the Churches are confronted in dealing with the working-men is the suspicion of the mercenary spirit. To the workingman, the clergyman is paid to do a certain job and must justify his existence. Of course this is a prejudice which is soon removed when the man gets into such personal relations with the minister as to feel the heartbeat of a true friendship, but often these personal relationships are hindered through the prejudice referred to. Do not these facts suggest that there is a need for one section of the Church which has not this disability and whose ministers are all laymen?