the circulars and letters of the Local Government Board are thrown in their teeth at every turn. They have succeeded after a struggle in reducing extravagant expenditure upon outdoor relief. The Local Government Board issues a circular commending it to Guardians. They endeavour to maintain some sort of discipline and regulation in workhouse management. The Local Government Board issues circulars enjoining relaxation and indulgences. Since Mr Goschen's circular of 1869, the central Board has in fact abdicated its old controlling function. The inspectors, in London at least, show little or no sign of official disapproval of laxity of administration. This has changed to some extent since Mr John Burns succeeded to the Presidency of the Local Government Board.
To sum up, then, if we may judge from the analogy of the election in question, there is no reality in our system of popular representation in local government. We hear the voice of political clubs and coteries, of churches and chapels, and of late especially the voice of a small but well-organised socialist party. The voice of the people is conspicuously silent: about one-eighth of the electorate only voted, and that under great pressure. The extreme subdivision of local administration, involving a wearisome multiplicity of elections, and obscuring the broader issues to the public mind, is to a great extent responsible for the discredit into which it has fallen. There is little inducement to the more capable citizens to offer themselves for election, and little inducement to the average elector to record his vote. The system has got into a rut out of which it is essential that it should be extricated.
It is sometimes urged that the remedy will come automatically: that the increase of rates will eventually bring about its own cure. This of
