MEMOIR ON PARENTAL ALCOHOLISM 31 



But the remarkable point is that the following words occur 

 in my letter to the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 

 immediately after the * compendium of estimates ' : 



' This is the basis of the statement made in the Memoir 

 that the I J. difference shown in the wage results might 

 reasonably be supposed to indicate an employer's preference 

 for sobriety, and did not mark an inferior physique or 

 mentality in the alcoholic section.' 



To this are appended the words : 



' The values given above agree substantially with the 

 values 165. and 25^. given for the sober and drinker on p. 4 

 of our original memoir, which Mr. Keynes misquotes in the 

 paragraph I have cited above. The 25^. (^d. and i^s. ^d, 

 are the wages when one or other parent drinks and when 

 neither drink, and apply to families with both parents 

 alive' (p. 228). 



Now Sir Victor states that *not from beginning to end 

 does he [K. P.] mention the original estimate published in 

 the first memoir ' which Sir Victor states that he supposes 

 will now ' be buried '. We have here another essentially 

 striking instance of Sir Victor's method of controversy. 

 He writes for an audience which he apparently assumes 

 have not seen and will not see my paper, and he then 

 deliberately states that a result which really confirms the 

 first statement as to the wages of the sober and the alcoholic, 

 makes no reference to that statement 'from beginning to 

 end ', and he further suggests that that statement, like other 

 ' inconvenient conclusions ', is ' buried '. The main point of 

 interest is, of course, that this very 'inconvenient conclusion', 

 so far from being buried, was substantiated by a fuller 

 inquiry, and the inquiry definitely stated that it was so 

 on the very page Sir Victor professed to cite ! 



I said in my'letter to the B, M, J., Feb. 4, 191 1, p. 280, 

 that the meaning of the word parent seemed to be quite 



