imported into London and the vast bulk of that consumed there are the produce of the beet. Besides the change from cane to beet, we have to note another change, which harmonises with the general tendency already observed as regards several other branches of the London commissariat-namely, the great increase in the proportion of sugar which reaches London in a state fit for consumption, as compared with that which needs to be subjected to a refining process. In 1898, of the 490,000 tons of sugar imported into London, over 200,000 tons were described as refined. Twenty-five years ago, of 280,000 tons which came to the port of London, all but 36,000 were raw. London sugar-refining has fallen on evil days, while, owing to the improvement of processes, the number of persons employed in refining has fallen off in greater proportion than the output, and several refineries in London have closed their doors in recent years.

The tendency of sugar to arrive in London already refined has undoubtedly been stimulated by the differential bounties accorded by several European countries on the export of refined, as compared with raw sugar. Whether the removal of those differential bounties would permanently restore the London refining industry, or not, is a question which admits of two opinions, in view of the forces working in the other direction. Cane sugar grown in tropical countries, ill supplied either with fuel or with skilled labour, is naturally sent to Europe to be refined, but there is no corresponding reason why beet sugar grown in Europe should not be rendered fit for consumption in the place of manufacture; and this in the long run may prove the most economical system, apart from any question of earning a higher rate of bounty. If, however, the abolition of all European bounties both on raw and on refined sugar should lead to the resuscitation of the sugar-cane as a source of the London supply, the London refiner, though not the London consumer, would stand to benefit accordingly.

After the contemplation of such mountainous piles of food, it may be with some feeling of relief that we turn our thoughts to drink. And first a word or two about the liquid which holds unchallenged its place as the staple drink of man, whether consumed in its native purity or disguised in the form of one of the innumerable beverages of which it is the chief constituent.

The London Water supply has in recent years become the centre of fierce controversies; it has been the subject of Committees and Commissions, of Parliamentary debates and legal disputes, and it is credited with the overthrow of a

Government. The heat of these contests is by no means abated, and an account of the London water question would require an article to itself at least as long as the present and a good deal more polemical. A few words and figures must suffice, and for the latter we are largely indebted to the late Major-General Scott's reports to the Local Government Board.

The first thing to be noted about London water supply is that it is local in its origin. London is not supplied from distant sources, as Manchester is supplied from Thirlmere and Birmingham from Wales, but draws its water exclusively from the two rivers-the Thames and its tributary the Lea-on which it is situated, and from a certain number of local springs and wells. The water drawn from these sources is supplied to Londoners by eight water Companies, which parcel out among themselves an area of 620 square miles known as the Metropolitan Water-Area, an area which is co-terminous neither with the County of London nor with so-called 'Greater London,' and which includes a population of over 5,750,000 human beings. In 1898 the quantity of water supplied by the Companies to this vast population reached the stupendous amount of 74,479,693,644 gallons, of which it is estimated that 80 per cent. was used for domestic purposes. This is equivalent to an average daily supply for all purposes of 35 gallons per head. Of course, only a very small percentage of this water is actually used for drinking purposes.

All but two of the Companies (the exceptions being the New River and the Kent Companies) draw a certain amount of water from the Thames, the intakes being at Hampton, West Molesey, and Sunbury. Two Companies (the New River and the East London) draw supplies from the Lea, at Ware and Chingford Mill respectively. Thirty-two wells in the chalk formation also contribute to the total supply, seventeen being north and fifteen south of the Thames. Four Companies are more or less dependent on these wells, but most of them are in the area of two of the Companies, viz., the New River on the north and the Kent Company on the south, the latter being entirely dependent on well water. Roughly speaking, 57 per cent. of the total water supply of London came in 1898 from the Thames, 22 per cent. from the Lea, and 21 per cent. from wells and springs. The percentage drawn from wells and springs has very largely increased in recent years, the corresponding proportion in 1885 being only 11 per cent.

The volume of flow both of the Thames and of the Lea varies enormously according to the season of the year. Thus the average daily discharge of the Thames over Teddington

Weir (i.e. the amount which but for withdrawals would have passed the Weir) in September 1898 was only 212,000,000 gallons, compared with 1,648,000,000 gallons in January; while in the case of the Lea the average daily flow at Fielde's Weir varied from 24,000,000 gallons in September to 70,000,000 gallons in January. In 1897 the variation of the flow of both rivers was even more marked. Conversely the daily demands of London are greater in summer than in winter, the average daily supply ranging in 1898 from 230,000,000 gallons in July to 188,000,000 in March. Though in September 1898 about three-fifths of the flow of the Thames was abstracted by the water companies, as a general rule the quantity drawn from the Thames amounts only to a comparatively small proportion of the total discharge. On the other hand, the volume of water supplied from the Lea is actually greater in the summer months than the total flow of the river, the excess being of course drawn from the reservoirs.

The official report referred to above comments on the fact that the volume of discharge of the River Lea during periods of drought falls far short of the requirements of the population of East London,' and notes how steadily the pressure on the existing sources of supply in the valley of the Lea has increased.' The repeated water famines in East London in recent summers will be fresh in everyone's memory.

In the aggregate the capacity of the reservoirs of the London water companies seems immense, amounting altogether to about 2,250,000,000 gallons, but when it is remembered that two and a half millions of people in the north and east of the metropolis depend, as to nine tenths of their water supply, on the River Lea and the underground water stored in its basin,' it will readily be understood why General Scott considered that even the recently completed works, which have increased the storage capacity of the East London Company's reservoirs from twenty to thirty days' supply, are insufficient to provide for the immediate future.

Between June 20th, 1898, when the reservoirs of the East London Company were full, and August 22nd, when the daily supply was restricted to two periods of three hours each, the store of water fell from 1,200,000,000 to 308,000,000 gallons. From September 3rd to November 23rd the supply was further restricted to two periods of two hours. After that date the periods of supply were gradually increased, until by December 14th constant supply had been resumed over the whole district. During the water famine the company received assistance not only from the New River, but from the Southwark and Vaux

hall, and the Kent Companies, water being pumped through the Tower Subway and the Blackwall Tunnel; but in spite of these efforts the supply during the five months of restriction is estimated by General Scott to have fallen short of the demand by about 1,700,000,000 to 1,800,000,000 gallons.

It is satisfactory to learn from the last official report of the late Sir E. Frankland that the Thames water delivered in London has, as regards organic impurity, greatly improved since 1860; and that as regards the same point the Lea water is of excellent quality, while the organic matter in the deepwell water supplied to London is much smaller in amount than in river waters.

It is impossible here to describe even in outline the various schemes that have been put forward for improving the water supply of London in the future. Several of the Companies are increasing their storage, and a general system of inter-communication has been introduced, to enable one Company to go to the assistance of another in case of some local failure such as took place on a huge scale in East London in 1898. It has also been proposed to make more elastic the statutory limit placed on the amount of water that may be taken from the Thames; and it has been suggested that the supply of fresh water might be supplemented by the use of salt water for watering the streets and other purposes. On the other hand there are many who are convinced that nothing short of opening up new and more distant sources of supply, such as tapping a lake in Wales, will permanently remove the danger of a recurring deficiency, as the demands of a rapidly increasing population in the Thames Valley tend to press more and more on the capacity of the existing sources. The question of improvement of water-supply is largely complicated and to some extent prejudiced by controversies between the advocates of private and of public control.

From water we naturally pass to the various liquors, alcoholic and other, in the composition of which water plays the chief part. Of these Tea may be taken first. The port of London is the point of entry for almost the whole of the tea imported into the United Kingdom. Last year, out of a gross total of 271,000,000 lb., 270,000,000 lb. came to London. In the same year 36,000,000 lb. were exported, leaving 235,000,000 lb. for home consumption; and as the stocks of tea in bonded warehouses at the end of the year showed little change compared with the previous year, we may assume that this represents roughly the annual consumption of the whole population, amounting to about 6 lb. per head. Londoners, in common Vol. 191.-No. 381.

K

In the

with the general mass of the population of the United Kingdom, have long been great tea drinkers, but the tea supply has undergone a revolution of a twofold character in recent years. first place the great reduction in duty has enormously increased consumption, and in the second place the development of the tea industry in India and Ceylon has practically driven Chinese tea from the English market.

In 1854, the year with which we are making many of our comparisons, the Customs duty on tea was 1s. 10d. per lb., and the total consumption in the United Kingdom was about 62,000,000 lb., or 24 lb. per head of the population. In 1898 the duty was 4d. per lb., and the consumption per head had risen to 6 lb. The change which has meanwhile taken place in the sources of supply may be seen from the following figures, which, though they refer generally to the United Kingdom and not specifically to London, may be safely applied to the London trade, seeing that over 99 per cent. of the tea which enters or leaves the United Kingdom passes through that port.

Fifty years ago practically the whole of the tea imported was Chinese. Of a gross total of 86,000,000 lb., over 83,000,000 lb. are credited in the trade accounts to China, and only 500,000 lb. to India; and of the Chinese tea which reached this country over 60,000,000 lb. were retained for home consumption. In 1898 China (including Hong Kong) only sent 27,000,000 lb. of tea to this country-about a tenth of the total import, and less than a third of her contribution at the earlier date; and of this dwindling amount more than half (16,000,000 lb.) was re-exported, leaving only 11,000,000 lb. for home consumption.

It may be remarked in passing that this enormous diminution of the use of Chinese tea in the United Kingdom, in face of the vast expansion of our population and the great increase of tea drinking, deserves to be borne in mind in relation to the general question of the development of trade with China, of which so much has lately been heard. Of course the total export of Chinese tea has not shrunk in anything like the above proportion, but it has diminished absolutely, as well as relatively to the world's demand; and this falling off has naturally had a depressing effect on the capacity of the Chinese population to purchase foreign manufactures.

The gap left by the shrinkage of Chinese teas in the London market has been much more than filled by the enormous development of the import from India and Ceylon. Last year no less than 131,000,000 lb. of Indian tea and 86,000,000 lb. of Ceylon tea were retained for consumption in the United Kingdom. Indian tea has been in the market since the sixties,