EDITOR'S TABLE. 



for the former, and only indirectly, 

 and in a manner they can not con- 

 trol, for the latter. In the former 

 case they want to get value for 

 the money they pay out; in the 

 latter case if they don't get value 

 they can not do anything about 

 it; the whole thing has passed be- 

 yond their control, and is largely 

 in the hands of ward politicians. So 

 the children go to school and come 

 home; and the average parent hard- 

 ly asks what they have learned or 

 whether they have learned anything. 

 It was long ago remarked by Adam 

 Smith that " the proper performance 

 of every service seems to require that 

 its pay or recompense should be as 

 exactly as possible proportioned to 

 the nature of the service." That is 

 the case with the washing of clothes, 

 but it is not the case with the educa- 

 tion of 'children. The parents who 

 pay the money have nothing to say 

 as to the quality of the article they 

 get in return ; and superintendents 

 and trustees are only able to a very 

 imperfect degree to proportion com- 

 pensation to the amount of useful 

 work done. Upon the whole the 

 " washerwoman " system has its good 

 points; and, disagreeing with Prof. 

 Davidson, we should be very glad if 

 it could be made applicable to the 

 whole business of education. 



THE DEPARTMENT STORE. 



A CORRESPONDENT regards as in- 

 adequate the recent explanation giv- 

 en in these columns of the origin of 

 the department store. Instead of 

 attributing it to the economies it 

 effects as a piece of labor-saving 

 machinery, which has come into ex- 

 istence under the operation of the 

 law of evolution, he ascribes it to the 

 influence of the heavy municipal 

 taxation that prevails in the United 

 States. In proof, he cites the fail- 

 ure of the department store, or rath- 

 er the country store, in new com- 

 VOL. LI. 53 



munities to prevent the growth of 

 the specialist. He cites also the city 

 of Chicago, saying that "here we 

 find the highest rate of taxation of 

 all the principal cities of America," 

 and the highest development of the 

 department store. 



That heavy taxation, as was 

 shown in the case of the match and 

 whisky industries during the civil 

 war, lends to concentrate business 

 in a few hands with large capital 

 we would not deny. Nor would we 

 deny that such concentration is ab- 

 normal and injurious. But while 

 we are willing to admit that further 

 municipal taxation in this country 

 has become very heavy and ought to 

 be materially reduced instead of in- 

 creased, as the tendency is, owing to 

 the extension of the sphere of gov- 

 ernment, we are not convinced that 

 it has become great enough to pro- 

 duce the department store. Were 

 that the case, the department store 

 would not be the only form that the 

 concentration of capital would as- 

 sume. Other industries, subjected 

 to the same influence, would also be- 

 come consolidated. But, as yet, we 

 have heard of no complaint of this 

 kind. What convinces us that this 

 view is correct is the fact that the 

 rate of taxation in Chicago, where 

 the movement against the depart- 

 ment store has assumed the greatest 

 proportions, is not higher than in 

 many other cities where there is no 

 serious complaint against this form 

 of industrial development. A refer- 

 ence to the Abstract of the Eleventh 

 Census and to the World Almanac 

 will show that the rate of taxation 

 in Boston, New York, Cincinnati, 

 Baltimore, San Francisco, and else- 

 where is higher than in Chicago. 



The failure of the so-called de- 

 partment store in new and growing 

 communities to prevent differentia- 

 tion and segregation is not difficult 

 to explain. In such communities 



