relation between the volume of stocks and that of annual supply.

Milk is one of the few articles of food which to any considerable extent are still produced in London itself, but, though the London cowkeepers still furnish their customers with some 7,000,000 or 8,000,000 gallons of milk per annum, or enough to supply the wants of a city of 500,000 inhabitants, the supply from this source is now small compared with the quantity of milk poured into London from the country. Exact statistics of milk consumption are not to be obtained, but by the aid of returns from the railway companies, and a calculation of the estimated yield of the cows in London, some rough idea may be formed of the London consumption. A few years ago Mr. Rew obtained returns from the railway companies showing that rather more than 40,000,000 gallons were brought by them to London in the course of a year. Adding 7,000,000 to 8,000,000 gallons for the output of London cowsheds, and 1,000,000 more for milk reaching London by road or in other ways, we get about 49,000,000 gallons as the consumption of milk in London in 1892, or about 11 gallons per head.

This allowance is considerably less than that usually made for the consumption per head of the whole population of the country, which is roughly 15 gallons. But on the one hand Londoners almost certainly drink less milk than country folk, and on the other hand they consume more condensed' milk. Mr. Rew thinks that London takes about one third of the condensed milk consumed, which, in the year to which his calculations relate, would be equivalent altogether to about 19,000,000 gallons of fresh milk. If Londoners consume condensed milk to the extent of the equivalent of 6,000,000 gallons, we have to add 1 gallons per head to the per capita consumption stated above, thus giving a total of 13 gallons per head. We dare not guess how much is to be added to this total on account of adulteration by water, but without any such allowance the average consumption would appear to amount to between a quarter and a third of a pint per day for every man, woman, and child in London.

This estimate is supported by such figures as are available from the consumers' point of view, though, as may be expected, consumption of milk varies very greatly, according to the social status and income of the family. Thus, Mr. Rew found that the average consumption of a number of West-end families was about three-quarters of a pint per head per day. On the

Journal of the Royal Statistical Society,' June 1892, p. 265.

other hand, the budgets of expenditure collected by the Economic Club show for thirty-eight persons of all ages in London an average expenditure of 34d. per head per week for milk, giving an average consumption of a pint and three quarters per week, or a quarter of a pint per day. If, in default of better data, we assume that these widely differing figures represent the average consumption of the middle and upper classes and of the working classes respectively, and take about one fifth of the London population as belonging to the former, we arrive at an average consumption of one third of a pint per head per day for the whole London population. At the present time the annual consumption of fresh milk in London must be over 50,000,000 gallons, and of this probably six sevenths come from the country by rail or road, chiefly from the home and midland counties, where the farmers have almost entirely renounced butter-making for the more lucrative business of supplying the vast demand of the capital for milk.

The supply of London with milk from the country is a growth of comparatively recent years. Before the advent of railways London was practically self-sufficing in this respect. Every dairyman was a cowkeeper, and in the middle of the century from 20,000 to 30,000 cows are said to have been kept in London. In 1854 the Quarterly Review estimated the number at 20,000, yielding 60,000 gallons of milk a day, and furnishing two thirds of the total milk supply of London. Even at that date railway-borne milk was a considerable element in the London supply, though subordinate to the produce of the London cows; but the secret of carrying the milk without deterioration through jolting had not yet been discovered. Necessity, however, is the mother of invention; and when the ravages of the rinderpest, which swept through the London cowsheds in the two next decades, compelled the London dairymen to look to the country for their supplies, the pressure of the growing demand caused the railway companies to improve their service and led to the invention of the milkcooler. Since then the supply of country milk to the London market has increased with gigantic strides, far more than keeping pace with population. Instead of being, as formerly, inferior to the produce of London sheds, country milk has long been recognised as superior in quality. Unable to compete with a superior article from the country, and hampered by the rising standard of sanitation in London, which increases the stringency of the County Council regulations for cowsheds, the London cowkeeper seems destined to disappear, except perhaps in the East-end of London, where he owes his continued

existence to the presence of the Jews. Kosher' milk must be milked direct into a jug or vessel and not mixed with other milk, so that the local cowkeeper will probably long be a familiar figure in Whitechapel. According to Mr. Baxter,* he is generally a Welshman; and members of this thrifty race seem to be the only dairymen who can still make cowkeeping pay. Usually he is a son or near relation of a small Welsh farmer, and, as in so many other dwindling trades, he has to work extremely hard for a very small return. Everywhere out of Whitechapel the cowkeeper seems doomed to extinction. Between 1891 and 1898 the number of licences granted for cowhouses was reduced from 597 to 375.

London having been beaten by the country districts as regards its milk supply, it remains to be seen if the country in turn has anything to fear from our over-sea competitors. Condensed milk, chiefly from Switzerland, has long been an important article of import, but, though a certain amount of 'raw' milk has been imported from France, the quantity is at present insignificant as an element in the London supply. Whether fresh milk can be profitably imported in the future depends largely on the much-debated question of preservatives. A great part of the country milk drunk in London is already 'doctored' with boracic acid or other chemicals to ensure its keeping; and experts are divided as to the danger or harmlessness of this treatment. There was some talk recently of the use of a secret preservative by an exporter in the north of France, and the matter actually gave rise to questions in Parliament. At present, however, there is no sign of any likelihood of serious competition from the Continent in the supply of fresh milk to London, though with recent developments in one's mind he would be a bold man who would affirm its permanent impossibility.

The distribution of milk in London tends more and more to fall into the hands of large firms with several branches. Thus in Kelly's Directory for 1895, 1450 dairymen were enumerated, compared with 1465 in 1870, when the population was much smaller. Over a third of the total number-mainly the smaller masters—are Welsh, the larger firms being almost all English. For some reason there appear to be no Scotch or Irish in this trade.

The rapidly increasing part played in recent years by the country districts in the supply of London with milk, has been accompanied by a corresponding decline in the proportion of

*Life and Labour of the People,' vol. vii, p. 15.

Butter which they furnish to the London market. Epping and Cambridge butters, once so famous, are known no more, and even Devonshire and Dorset are far less important as sources of supply than Normandy and Denmark. As regards the United Kingdom as a whole, the foreign butter consumed now outweighs the home production probably by two to one; but in London the proportions are still more striking. A large butter dealer estimates that 95 per cent. of the butter consumed in London is of foreign origin.

Normandy has a very large market for butter in London, where it is known commercially as 'Brittany butter'; and a large quantity of Danish butter comes over, chiefly in the winter months. The great advantage of these foreign butters over their English rivals is their uniformity of quality. This is secured in Denmark by the system of huge co-operative' dairies, to which the neighbouring farmers send their milk. In Normandy the factor buys the butter ready made from the dairymen twice or thrice a week, after which it is roughly sorted, and the best qualities are ground up together in a butter mill into one uniform article. The large butter dealers complain that English and Irish dairymen do not take trouble to make butter uniform in quality, colour, and saltness, so that, with the increasing concentration of the London trade in the hands of large dealers the home produce has practically been beaten out of the field. It remains to be seen how far the co-operative dairies which are springing up in various parts of Ireland will succeed in removing the reproach which formerly attached to Irish butter. But, as hinted above, the causes which have curtailed the supply of butter from the home and midland counties to London are too deep-seated to be wholly removed by any improvement in the quality of the article or even by any

scheme of wholesale butter factories. The itinerant butterschools sent round the rural districts under the auspices of the Technical Education Committees of the various County Councils have probably more effect on the quality of the butter consumed locally than on the food supply of London and the large towns. The fact is that the operations of supplying milk and butter to London are, to a large extent, mutually exclusive industries, and that, for districts within a certain radius from London and within reasonable distance of a railway, it is, at present, more profitable to send fresh milk than butter. Such home-made butter as is consumed in London comes chiefly from districts outside that radius-e.g. Devonshire or Ireland; and Normandy commands as easy access to the London market as either of these districts.

The introduction of so-called 'Brittany' butter to London furnishes an interesting case of the indirect economic results of political events. Formerly Paris was the great market for the butter of north-west France. But in 1870-71 the German armies separated the capital from the farmers of Normandy and Brittany, and the eyes of the latter were therefore turned elsewhere. Shipment after shipment was sent to London, at first with no favourable results, although the butter was offered wholesale at 1s. 1d. per lb., while 2s. was the retail price of the best English butter. At last it came under the notice of Mr. Hudson, now known as the 'butter king,' who tasted it and bought up all the French butter in the market. Had it not been for the accidental dislocation of industry by the FrancoGerman war, Normandy butter might have had to wait some time longer for its opportunity to invade the English market, but the economic advantages on its side would have brought it to our doors sooner or later. At present three-quarters of the Brittany butter which comes to London is said to be exported by two large French firms. But, with the perfecting of arrangements for cold storage in transit, other countries more distant than Normandy and Denmark, or even than Sweden and Finland, have begun to contribute to the London butter supply. In winter a quantity of frozen Australian butter comes over, especially about Christmas, and much of it is kept in cold stores at the docks or at the private stores of large dealers, to be distributed daily to customers as required. If, as is estimated, half the Australian butter imported is consumed in London and the neighbourhood, the contribution of Australia to the London butter supply last year was nearly 6000 tons. Canada and the United States also send some butter to the London market, and during the last three or four years a considerable and promising trade has sprung up with the Argentine Republic.

As to the average consumption of butter per head we are dependent upon estimates, for there are no direct statistics of butter production. Following, however, the usual calculations of the average amount of milk produced from a milch cow, we find that the home production of milk in the United Kingdom averages about 37 gallons per head of population, which, after deducting 15 gallons for the milk consumption, leaves 22 gallons for the home production of butter and cheese. For the division of this milk between butter and cheese we are dependent on the conjectures of experts, and these are well summarised in Mr. Rew's paper to which reference has already been made. On the whole we shall probably not be far wrong in assuming that of the milk used in making butter and cheese about