The thirty-three firms, the authorities of which are returned as having stated that they give men at night work done by women during the day, consist for the most part of printing houses, and the work done by women was folding. The result produced by legislation is that men do the folding at night and on Saturday afternoons, when there is a press of business, but in one or two cases, a regular staff of night workers is employed. As the men are slower workers than the women, and charge a far higher price for their labour, it is to the employer's interest to reduce nightwork to a minimum. Prospectuses, however, and weekly newspapers have to be folded during the night, and this must fall to the men's lot. In two firms, men occasionally do relief stamping for Christmas cards when there is a great press of work, and in one firm they do card mounting. In none of the above firms is there any question of employing men instead of women in the daytime. In one of the remaining two--a printing house--the manager said that perhaps he might have more women for folding; and in another the employer distinctly said that he would employ women for feeding his printing machines were it not for the limitations on their hours, which renders it impossible to keep them when a press of work comes in. These few cases can scarcely claim to constitute a serious hindrance to women's employment; nor, in view of the chorus of gratitude for factory legislation, can they be regarded as a serious indictment against that legislation. * * * * * [Sidenote: Has legislation affected wages?] On the question as to whether the restrictions of the Factory Acts have affected wages, it is almost impossible to obtain any trustworthy information. In briefly touching on it, we must be careful to distinguish between the rate of wages and the sum total earned. There seems an entire lack of evidence that the _rate_ of wages has been affected, although the sum total of women's earnings collectively and individually is obviously lowered, when some of their work is given to men. But even then the mere deprivation of the chance of working unlimited overtime is an altogether exaggerated measure of the loss in wages. A human being differs from a machine, for, even when the work done is mechanical, an interval of leisure and rest is essential, after a certain point, before the output can be continued. Experience has abundantly proved that for the regular worker overtime does not pay, and is also a wasteful expedient from the point of view of the employer.