activity, but also a considerable degree of special skill and training. The calculation of quantities, costs, and food values, which is a part of daily routine, calls of itself for rather more than ordinary ability and knowledge. The watching of the markets for the ebb and flow of supplies and the rise and fall of prices, the composition of the menu so as to make full use of the more plentiful foods and at the same time to please customers and provide well-balanced meals, the ordering of the cooking and serving, all require that breadth of judgment and degree of resource which comes only from a specialised training. The number of women possessing these qualifications is unhappily not large, but the domestic science colleges and cookery schools throughout the country are doing a great deal to supply the deficiency, while the kitchens already at work can be and are being used for the training under expert superintendents of women who will become superintendents in turn.

It is particularly necessary that superintendents shall possess, in addition to expert knowledge of cookery and food values, a knowledge of local conditions and requirements, and the virtues of tact and discretion. Any appearance of patronage or dictation will destroy the popularity of the kitchen; and ignorance of local conditions will destroy half its value. The experience and advice of Care Committee workers, and any others well acquainted with the people and their circumstances, should be obtained to the fullest possible extent; and there should be no attempt to institute a uniform system or menu for all localities.

It ought not to be necessary to insist that superintendents, cooks, and helpers should be paid workers, receiving salaries befitting their qualifications, abilities, and services; but many people still harbour the curious belief that any undertaking which can claim to be for the common good can and ought to be run by unpaid or illpaid workers. That idea has spelt the doom of many a promising communal enterprise, and, if it is to creep into the organisation of public kitchens, will lead to failure. Unless an adequate remuneration is offered, the right type of woman will not be obtainable for the more responsible posts, and the supply of such trained women will be cut off at its source. Even as regards the subordinate

positions the practically universal experience of the war period is that voluntary helpers are more bother than they are worth.' They do not stick it out,' they do not readily submit to discipline, they are often irregular in attendance, and they are apt to give an impression of condescension and patronage. This is the general experience. There are, of course, splendid exceptions, but a movement of national scope cannot be run on a hope that exceptions will prove the rule. Where in particular cases it is deemed desirable to use voluntary help, it is suggested that such help should be under corporate discipline, such as that afforded by the Women's Army Auxiliary Corps.'

Hitherto the great majority of kitchens have opened only for certain hours in the day, usually confining themselves to the provision of the midday meal. In due course some kitchen may find that there is a demand for evening meals, and even for breakfast portions, sufficient to justify their opening at other hours. Very few of those most likely to patronise the public kitchens make a heavy meal in the evening, but there might be a demand at a very early hour-say five or six in the morning-for cold lunches which the workman could take with him to his place of employment. The demand, however, is likely to be modified by the establishment of kitchens in factory districts, or of canteens at the works; and, as a general rule, the midday opening will suffice. It is a matter for judgment and experiment in each case, as is also the question whether the kitchens should open on Sundays. The usual experience is that, while some people buy on the Saturday enough for the Sunday meal, many more prefer to have the Sunday dinner cooked at home, the effect of which is seen in a lessened demand on the Monday, when the residue of the Sunday meal is eaten. The practice of the German and Austrian municipal kitchens is very varied in this respect. The commonest practice appears to be to serve only one meal per day, generally the midday meal; but there are exceptions to the rule. At Vienna the kitchens open at 5.30 and 6 o'clock in the morning to serve breakfasts of coffee and flour soup, and again at noon to serve the midday broth. At one time they were again opened for

the evening meal, but this was subsequently discontinued because of the shortage of supplies. An evening meal service was started at Frankfort in May last and is well patronised, some 2000 participants being served daily.

It may be useful to note the attitude of the German public towards the public kitchens that have been established for its benefit. The usual experience has been that people have begun by holding aloof from the public kitchens, partly from sheer inertia, but also from a desire to see who patronised the kitchens and how they fared. Hesitation on the latter score was speedily overcome by experience of the good value offered by the kitchens and the convenience of ready-cooked meals, but the breakingdown of 'false pride' has been a slower matter. A commentator on the Berlin system in October 1916, when the kitchens had been in operation for three months, states that the institution was still not so popular as was expected. The stigma of charity' still attached to the public meals; and many people thought it beneath their dignity to take advantage of them. Although they experienced great difficulties in obtaining provisions and often had to stand for a long time in the queues outside shops, many would starve rather than go for public meals. An enquiry made in August 1916 into the feeling in sixtyfour industrial districts showed that, except in cases of real destitution, public kitchens were unpopular among the majority of people. This feeling has, however, since then worn down. As the winter came on, all sentimental objections were swept away by the sheer difficulty of obtaining food at the shops; and the people's kitchens are now patronised regularly by people of all classes. In Munich, an enquiry was held on a particular day in November into the class of persons who used the kitchens and paid for their meals. Of 1100 persons, 20 were independent owners of businesses, 31 members of the liberal professions, 65 State and municipal officials, 40 persons without any occupation, 63 soldiers, and 632 working men and women.

Unless the food situation in this country becomes very much worse than it is at the present time, it is not to be expected that the patronage of public kitchens will reach anything like German dimensions. All the records go to show that the number of participants falls or rises

according as the food situation temporarily improves or worsens. Experience shows that the majority do not use the kitchens from unconstrained preference, but rather resort to them under the pressure of circumstances, from lack of means or from difficulty of obtaining food or of cooking it in the ordinary way at home. It is possible, however, that continued use of the kitchens under pressure of circumstances will in time weaken the force of custom and create a 'ready-cooked' habit in its place; and it is noticeable that, even when, in the spring, food has been comparatively abundant for a month or two, the kitchens have continued to supply a large, though reduced, number of meals.

The difficulty of attracting patronage to the public kitchen will be very largely overcome if proper means are taken to explain the system to those expected to make use of it. A simple leaflet, written by someone acquainted with the people as well as the system, should be printed and widely distributed. This leaflet should call attention to one or two salient and easily comprehensible advantages of the kitchens, such as the saving in time and in gas or fuel. It should make it perfectly clear that the kitchen is not a charity establishment, and that it simply gives value for money. At the same time it should be made equally clear that it is not intended to put money into the pocket of the State or anyone else. Such a leaflet, aided by the personal influence of individuals locally known and trusted, will bring in many of the more level-headed and intelligent at the start; and their experience, if satisfactory, will convert the rest.

The sole argument of any moment advanced against the principle of the public kitchen is that it is a 'communistic experiment' which must tend to break-up family life. The answer is, firstly, that the question is practical, not theoretical, concerned with conditions, not tendencies; secondly, that the private home has already been affected by the withdrawal of its menfolk for military service and its womenfolk for industrial employment; and thirdly, that the system as worked affects no part of the home except the oven, for the meals issued will not be consumed at the kitchens (the provision of dining facilities is not contemplated), but will be carried away and eaten wherever the meal would otherwise

have been consumed, at the place of employment, or at school.

In considering the whole question, it will be well to keep in mind not only the present but the future. On the one hand there is the possibility that the food situation may become worse, and that large numbers of dwellers in the great towns may find the difficulties of securing food so great as to be in real danger of semistarvation. Such a contingency may be too remote to require immediate consideration, but there can be no doubt that the establishment of a well-planned system of public kitchens would provide, perhaps, the best of all insurances against its occurrence. On the other hand, there is the certainty that the value of the system would not disappear with the war. It cannot be too often repeated that the two greatest difficulties in the way of good cooking and economical household expenditure are want of time and want of appliances. The harassed mother of many children, possessing few utensils and perhaps out at work for the greater part of the day, is driven perforce to the food which is easiest to procure and prepare, independent of economy or nutriment value. The ultimate remedy, no doubt, is a general raising of the standard of life, but in the meantime the public kitchen, supplying a varied, palatable and sustaining diet at a low price, would do much to make money go further and to avert the dangers of malnutrition, especially for women and children. The exceptional pressure of the present time affords a unique opportunity of introducing and popularising such establishments; and, if the opportunity is firmly seized and wisely handled, it will become the means of conferring a permanent benefit as well as of meeting an immediate crisis.

JOHN HILTON.