As regards the second reason, that of undue expense, Mr. Haggard in 1905, found a loss to the Army of $50,000. While, since that time, in the case of the California Colony, there has been no further loss, yet in the case of the colony in Colorado, there has been much expenditure which should be added to the original loss. The Army states that it has been too liberal in its dealings with its colonists, but we note that, in spite of its liberality, there has been a constant tendency for the colonists to leave, hoping to do better elsewhere.[79] The Army might reply that this is no argument, and that the fact that they were able to leave with funds on hand was in itself a proof of liberality on the Army's part, but to prove the success of its experiment, it must show that those who have left have done better elsewhere, and not drifted back once more to the city. The Army might further state that in future a better selection of land might be made, and that other unfavorable things might be avoided, but we are dealing here with these two colonies and not future experiments. As regards such, there would always be unforeseen difficulties of every kind.[80] Coming to the third reason for our conclusion, the reason that money might be expended in other ways with greater advantage to the unemployed, and with greater relief to the congestion of cities, we refer again to the recommendations of the Departmental Committee appointed by the English government to consider Commissioner Haggard's report.[81] In their report they recommend a system of emigration from the city to the English possessions, such as Canada, aided by the government, in preference to the system of colonization. With this we agree. A man once transported from the city and then thrown on his own resources in a favorable rural environment, will be more likely to succeed than a man who is taken out with a number of others to form a colony. The man left to his own resources will rise to the occasion, as so many have done in both Canada and the United States, who have migrated from city to country and made successful farmers and citizens, while, on the other hand, the man who feels dependent on an organization, which is responsible to the public for his success, and its own, will blame it for his own lack of efficiency. The Army itself claims a successful work done along the lines of emigration. In 1905, through the agency of the Army, 2,500 men were sent out from London to Canada. This number has since increased every year until in 1907 over 15,000 men were sent out. Many other emigration societies have been very successful in this work.[82] The emigrants sent out with some assistance, in many cases, gain new ambitions in life and make pronounced successes on the new soil. As regards the cost, the following quotation may be submitted. "The cost of emigration to Canada from England does not amount to more than £10 a head, and some of the