As in London, so in the whole of England and Wales, the decline in the number of casual paupers which set in so soon after the beginning of the war continued throughout the war. Taking the numbers relieved on or about the first of January each year, there were in 1914, 7,719 persons in the casual wards, and this number fell to 5,351 in 1915, 4,034 in 1916, 2,885 in 1917, 1,556 in 1918, and 1,053 in 1919. In 1920, however, as a result of postwar conditions, the number rose to 2,086.

Discussing the situation on January 1, 1916, the New Statesman noted that "for the first time in three centuries the ablebodied pauper has practically disappeared out of the land." Up and down the country the able-bodied wards of the workhouses had been "emptied of all who were really able-bodied; the army of tramps on the road, estimated in bad years at as many as 80,000, has dwindled to a few poor stragglers; the casual ward stands often night after night unoccupied." The significance of this change was not lost sight of. This remarkable disappearance of the able-bodied pauper, according to the New Statesman,' brought home "an uncomfortable conviction of our uncharitableness in believing evil of our fellow-creatures. These vagrants, these melancholy workhouse inmates, were after all, not so incurably 'workshy' as we had complacently assumed." It was pointed out that these ex-casuals were at the lowest level of the wage-earning group. They had not left the workhouses for comfortable jobs at fabulous wages. They were for the most part earning not more than a pound a week, or at the most as much as thirty shillings. Contractors and farmers and wharf-foremen in different parts of the country were said to be actually getting unskilled laborers at such rates, with food 40 per cent above normal prices. But the war had demonstrated that the able-bodied wards would be emptied whenever there was any reasonable assurance of a continuity of hard manual toil at four or five shillings a day.

In

consequence of the decline in the number of homeless men and women, casual wards in the workhouses became empty and were quickly put to other uses. In 1918 the Local Government Board reported that superfluous casual wards were being closed

1VI, 296.

not agree that Fisher's formula expresses the all-sufficient truth may thus welcome a practical compromise using his form where another is not specifically required, in order to eliminate the multiplicity of possible results and thus facilitate comparisons.

VII. WHY 1924 WEIGHTS GIVE THE LOWER RESULT

But why should 1907 weights give this higher result? One might at first expect the contrary—that 1924 production would amount to more when judged by the standards (i.e., weights) of its own year. One might even jump to the conclusion that the lower result with the 1924 weights indicated an industry not responsive to changes in demand, and which therefore failed to emphasize the most valuable commodities. We shall see, however, that this does not at all follow from the data we used.

The reason why the use of the base year weights of 1907 gives a higher figure than the end year weights of 1924 is that those commodities whose production increased most during the period experienced an even more rapid decline in their relative value per unit. This caused the commodities whose quantities increased most to include in 1924 a smaller percentage of the total value added by manufacture than they had formed in 1907.

But this fact that the commodities which increased most suffered a more than corresponding fall in unit values may in turn be explained by one or both of the following factors: (a) that, to coin a new expression, their relative elasticities of demand through time were less than unity. This is equivalent to saying that their relative flexibilities of value through time were greater than unity. While a more detailed discussion of this concept is reserved for a future treatment, when a formula for its measurement will be offered, it should perhaps be stated that it differs from the Marshallian concept of elasticity by including not merely changes on the demand curve resulting from changes in the quantity of the commodity in question but also changes of the demand curve resulting from changes in the quantity of other commodities; (b) that the actual historical cost curves of these commodities had a sharper downward slope to the right than those of the commodities which did not show such an advance in physical output.

If, over a period of time, the marginal cost of the A commodities (those whose quantities increased more than the average) increased less or diminished more than those of the B commodities (those whose quantities increased less than the average), then the unit values of the former would be less and their quantities greater than would have been the case with identical cost curves. If the fall in unit values more than counterbalanced the greater increase in quantities, the results would be lower weights in the case of the A commodities for the end year than for the base, which is, of course, precisely what happened in fact.

It is, of course, impossible to tell which of these two main forces had the greater influence, but the whole subject is one that merits further inductive study.

VIII. DIFFERENCES PRODUCED IN SPECIFIC INDUSTRIAL GROUPS
BY THE TWO METHODS OF WEIGHTING

The detailed results for different industries repay considerable study. Although Table V nearly explains itself, we will call attention here to a few of the more important showings:

1. In general, base year weights produce the higher result for each detailed group just as they did for the final index. The exceptions are non-ferrous metals and textiles. In both cases, the opposite result was due to one or more peculiarities in the relation between production changes and value changes as recorded. In the case of copper, this seems to have been due to a drastic decrease in the cost of production; in the case of linen, jute, and hemp, demand seems to have decreased drastically. The result in

both

cases was a much greater decrease in the weights (based on value) than the decrease in physical production. In the case of copper and brass alloys, woolen goods, clothing, millinery, hosiery, boots and shoes, there was a much greater increase of weights than of production. This indicates a comparative increase of real value per unit. It might be brought about by a general shifting of demand (shift of the schedule to the right), but is most probably due to our inability to measure the full extent of the increase in production from increased fabrication. Thus the unit of product is not the same in the last year as in the first, and from being a finer product it gets a higher relative value.

local education authorities to supply free meals to school-children who were unable because of lack of food to take full advantage of the education provided for them. Table XV shows the extent of school feeding from the year 1913 to 1920.

TABLE XV

NUMBER OF AUTHORITIES PROVIDING SCHOOL MEALS, Num-
BER OF CHILDREN FED, AND NUMBER OF MEALS

PROVIDED FOR THE YEARS 1913-20:

ENGLAND AND

The number of children fed at school increased from 156,531 in the year ending March 31, 1914, to 422,401 in the year ending March 31, 1915-an increase of 265,870, or 169.9 per cent, during the first year of the war. It is also significant that the number of areas in which children were fed also increased from 98 in the year preceding the war to 134 during the first year of the war. The decline in the number of children fed and in the number of areas in which children were fed was rapid after the industrial recovery during the second year of the war; and this decline continued until the year ending March 31, 1920, when the number of children fed increased again along with the increase in post-war unemployment. Thus there was a very marked increase (of 36.0 per cent) in the number of areas providing meals in the year ending March 31, 1920, as compared with the preceding year, and an increase of 15,812, or 29.4 per cent, in the number of the children fed.

It is of interest that along with the decline in the number of children fed during the war, there was an increase in the number of meals paid for by parents. The great increase in the employ

ment of married women outside the home, the increased ability of parents to pay, and the increased rise in the prices of food were assigned as the chief causes for the change.

The chief medical officer of the Board of Education reviewed in the last year of the war the school-feeding situation as follows:

Soon after the outbreak of war in 1914, the number of necessitous children fed under the provisions of the Act reached its maximum, but with the distribution of the naval and military separation allowances, the rise in wages, and the increase of opportunities for employment, the number declined, until at the present time the number of necessitous school children being fed is considerably less than that at any other period since 1906. On the other hand, owing to circumstances arising out of the War, a larger number than heretofore of children who cannot be said to be necessitous have been provided for by Local Education Authorities. In these cases some payment in return for the meals supplied has been made by the parents or guardians of the children. The chief factors which have contributed to this increase of provision for non-necessitous children are the greatly enhanced price of foodstuffs, and the extensive employment of married women in factories and workshops. This latter fact, in occasioning the withdrawal of the mother from the home, has rendered impossible in a number of cases the preparation and supply of a mid-day meal in the home for the children, and consequently there has been an increased demand for school meals.1

Table XVI indicates the total expenditure for the provision of school meals and the proportion of this expenditure which was contributed by parents.

1Annual Report for the Year Ending March 31, 1918, of the Chief Medical Officer of the Board of Education (Cd. 9206), p. 128.