EVOLUTION fflVTOW comes the theory that in our 
■1^1 fight against insect pests we are 
‘evolving’ hardier strains or varieties! For ex¬ 
ample, the potato beetle and San Jose scale. It is said that what 
were standard mixtures of poison will not destroy the beetles as 
they did ten years ago. This, it is claimed, means that hardier 
strains of the beetles have been bred. They can stand more 
arsenic. They represent a sort of ‘survival of the fittest.’ In the 
same way it is claimed that some of the standard sprays are not 
as effective against the scale as they formerly were.” 
The Rural Neiv Yorker in quoting the above news follows the 
statement of the theory with a reply credited to Professor Me- 
lander, which assures us not to become too alarmed at this dread¬ 
ful discovery. Human ingenuity is still able to cope with the 
biological ingenuity of pests. We'll fool them, point and counter¬ 
point. When the scales have bred themselves to the point where 
the arsenical spray is but an agreeable douche, we shall turn about 
and switch our methods. The word will go round to attack with 
sulphur-lime. Perhaps in twenty years that, too, will have lost 
its effect and become a pleasant lotion or a beverage for the pests. 
In another twenty years we switch again and employ oil emulsion. 
Twenty years later — well, start the process over again. If, how¬ 
ever, the arsenic, sulphur, oil, resistant qualities are retained, 
something new will have to be developed, but we are sure of a 
policy for about fifty years, at any rate. 
But the thought is disquieting. Suppose that all our other pests 
develop in evolution qualities that resist our poisons, character¬ 
istics that combat our preventive efforts. The fly under years of 
“swatting” campaigns grows a hard shell and refuses to be 
squashed. What then? Will the arms of human swatters show a 
proportionate increase of strength to crush him? Tent cater¬ 
pillars may acquire something of the salamander nature and re¬ 
fuse to be burnt, may develop an asbestos-like fire-resistant hide. 
Our best hope lies in the hope that the day of the super-insect 
will not too much precede the day of the super-man, for without 
the help of a super-poison the future looks very black. 
HOME IN the report of the Country Life Commis- 
HO LID AYS m- sion, Professor Bailey remarked upon the 
lack of amusement, of healthy sport and intel¬ 
lectual pleasure enjoyed by those who live in obscure rural dis¬ 
tricts. He urged the revival of the pageant, the harvest celebra¬ 
tion, the music festival of the year’s coming of age. And it was a 
thoughtful and wise advice. 
Such celebrations occupied important positions in days gone bv. 
It was an active and moving influence in Greek life. Latin nations 
still preserve to a greater degree than we do the feast days of 
the calendar. Their celebrations are really a legitimate heritage 
from the celebrations that were held in honor of pagan god and 
goddess. And we, too, have our Saints’ days or our feast days; 
we have our “holy” days. But how colorless have they become! 
We now look judiciously over modern glasses and say, “Holidays 
are essential. Let us, using the occasions of historic days, give 
our inhabitants a time for recreation.” And we watch for the 
increased efficiency resultant from the few hiatus periods of the 
working year. It is true that there are societies endeavoring to 
develop the esthetic celebration of these our Saints’ days; and the 
work is good. Our schools are and will be stimulated more and 
more to recognize the thought and the ideals back of the birth of 
president and discoverer and national idol. Indeed, it is time that 
stress were laid upon such phases of our life. 
There is another side to a holiday, another form of celebration 
that is a little more personal than the regulations of the Board 
of Education, than the exercises which are to encourage love and 
patriotism when carried on by large groups. This is the part 
the home plays in our holidays. 
One reads of an organization to restrict the giving of Christ¬ 
mas gifts, one sees Christmas as a mere mark on the calendar 
denoting the passage of the year. One finds the functions that 
various members of the family play in the joys of Christmas 
turned over to syndicate workers. The caterer or the hotel serves 
the Christmas dinner and mechanically passes printed words of 
greeting. The expressions of love and sympathy which used to 
be the sign of a merry feeling of Christmas are planned and pur¬ 
chased, mailed, addressed and delivered by organizations that 
have arisen for the purpose. Is it business spirit, the craving for 
efficiency, or is it merely indifference, laziness, or ennui ? 
This magazine has tried to suggest the anticipation of Christ¬ 
mas. Each of its readers is one who holds the ideal of home and 
cherishes it in his heart. It is he who has the power of bringing 
back Christmas. It is he, because of his ideals, who can appre¬ 
ciate the necessity of idealism. Let him hold Christmas in his 
deepest regard. 
It is not more essential for our nation, for us individually, that 
the celebrations of national holidays be recognized and interpreted 
to stimulate our patriotism, than that the home Christmas become 
more a true and vital part of our family life. Love and Service 
are the virtues which belong to Christmas. They are the ideals 
that Christmas fosters and stimulates. We need them. 
And then there is such a joy to Christmas. Why is it we need 
to plead for it? The old merrymaking, the former traditions 
which graced Christmas—why not gather them all together in one 
great merrymaking time of game and feast, of music, and, yes, 
the giving of gifts? Let us have our legend of Yule, our holly 
and our mistletoe. They will never grow trite and the more we 
work at it, the more of our effort concerned, so much more will 
be our joy and our happiness. 
HOME r I 'HE burden of much of the serious lite- 
HUSBANDRY A rary effort published is the feminist 
movement. Authors see the awakening of a 
sex consciousness in women and seek to arrive at the causes of 
the vast stirring. Many say that it is the desire for occupation, 
that years of empty purpose have made women restless. The his¬ 
torical argument is used. Obsolete labors of the pioneer women 
are held as an example. She combed and carded wool, spun the 
yarn and wove it into clothes. There were the difficult and wear¬ 
ing tasks of churning butter and cheese, making soap and can¬ 
dles, preserving, curing meats, and making rugs. All this is gone 
and serious minds say that woman feels the loss of this, her quon¬ 
dam business. 
These statements simply add emphasis to the truth that those 
home-making labors were valuable to women then and they have 
an intrinsic merit now, whether they bear on suffrage or not. 
For the woman who is bored there is nothing like the domestic 
occupations of her ancestors. Do not say that the effort is wasted 
where the individual competes with the economical production 
facilities of systematized plants. That is not the question. The 
woman gains in producing a thing known to be good and whole¬ 
some in her preserve making and jelly concocting. She adds the 
touch of hand artistry not found in machine work when she makes 
rugs or braids basketry. But best of all comes the sense of the 
joy in work, the hand-producer’s pride in craft. That is some¬ 
thing truly gained. Even to-day there is the possibility of making 
something that is worth while, a saving on household expense, a 
thing which has all the pleasure of “I did it.” There is ample 
room for the woman in the country to find beneficial occupation 
that counts without going far afield. 
(390) 
