A comparatively small fraction of the great fortunes of the country is invested in realty, and for the country as a whole real estate is the safeguard of the poor but thrifty. To reduce rents below the average interest on conservative investments is to discourage thrift and home owning. Temporarily and to a small degree increase of land tax will stimulate building and thereby, by disturbing the relation of supply and demand, reduce rents. But this effect will last only until those who hold unsalable land have made the best of a bad investment. No one will continue to engage in any kind of a business beyond the point at which it yields a return fairly equivalent to that obtainable in other lines. It is almost an axiom that 4 per cent of the total cost of any kind of a building must be allowed for taxes, insurance, repairs, depreciation, &c. As much as 9 or 10 per cent of the investment must therefore be charged in rentals, to equal even quiet investments which require very little personal attention. In a small town or in suburbs, where the land value is about $200 for a twenty-foot front lot, a cottage can be built, with proper plumbing and lighting equipment, so as to represent a total investment of somewhat less than $1,000. This corresponds to a yearly rental of $90, or thereabouts. How far the enormously increased land value can be counterbalanced by building on a large scale, but with inevitably more expensive material, is a question to be carefully considered. But the rental must be calculated on a business basis unless the problem is solved by a frank reversion to charity. While it is unfortunate that any one should be poor, it does not seem strange that 30 per cent of the earnings of the very poor, in a city where there is literally too little land for the inhabitants, should go for a home. Rent nowadays often includes water, care of exterior of premises, and sometimes heat and light. A generation ago 25 per cent, without any of these extras, was considered a fair average for the moderately well-to-do family. A. L. BENEDICT, M.D. [Editor _Buffalo Medical Journal_.] Buffalo. THE BABY GARDEN TO THE EDITOR: As long as most mothers were able to stay at home and personally care for their babies, the care of children remained an individual matter. But, present economic conditions which force so many young mothers to earn a living away from their homes and babies, present this problem. How shall these babies be adequately cared for, in their mother’s absence?