i8 A REPLY TO CRITICISMS OF THE 



to 'low grade' jobs, and because they were of superior 

 stock they had children physically and mentally as fit as 

 the sober stock. We wonder what place this leaves for 

 Sir Victor Horsley's marked toxic influence ! Yet Sir Victor 

 Horsley cites Professor Marshall with approval, in all proba- 

 bility merely because the latter has criticized our Memoir. 

 To refute Professor Marshall's position it was needful to 

 show that the drinkers did not follow ' low grade ' jobs. 

 Accordingly, a list was formed of all the trades, and it 

 was at once obvious that the sober and the drinking sec- 

 tions were scattered through all trades alike, and that 

 the latter were not concentrated on ' low grade ' jobs.^ 

 Of this list of trades I shall have something to say shortly. 

 The question then arose as to some rough classification 

 of these trades, and the only method of classifying them 

 according to the ability and physique needed for their 

 pursuit seemed to be that of classifying them according to 

 the current wages of the trade in the district. In doing 

 this it was not material to determine whether the drinking 

 workman was in receipt of the full time wages of the trade. 

 The question was : Had he selected a trade which required 

 ability and physique ? The trades followed by the drinking 

 section, as judged by the wage standard, were found to be 

 on the whole those requiring the greater intelligence and 

 strength — they were not ^ low grade jobs '. When the 

 drinking workman chose his trade — in the great bulk of 

 cases before the question of alcohol had become crucial — he 

 chose the higher class of employment. The reader who 

 will carefully study our attitude in this matter will see how 

 absurd it has been for Sir Victor Horsley and Dr. Sturge 

 to quote the trade wages as cited by us from a table of 

 them given in the Edinburgh Report^ as if they were and 



1 Questions of the Day and the Fray, No. I, p. lo. Dulau & Co. 



