THE House of Commons recently granted to Mr. Hume a return of the number of persons apprehended for being drunk and guilty of disorderly conduct, in the streets of London, Edinburgh, and Glasgow, respectively, for a series of years, up to the close of 1851. Taking the last year embraced in this curious return, it appears that the number of persons drunk and disorderly picked up in London (or more properly, the whole metropolis), was 24,203, the population being 2,526,693 or about 1 in 106; in Edinburgh, with a population of 166,000, the number was 2794- or about 1 in 60; while in Glasgow, with a population of 333,657, the number was 14,870 or 1 in 22. In other words, Glasgow seems to be three times more given to intoxication than Edinburgh, and five times more drunken than London!

These statistics have led to some altercation. Instead of simply adopting the facts, and making the best of them, certain journalists of Glasgow have attempted to explain away the apparent drunkenness of their city, and to fasten a quarrel on the Scotsman newspaper for having drawn attention to the subject. All these wranglings are profitless. That Glasgow is distinguished for its intemperance, is a misfortune to be looked distinctly in the face; and whether other cities are a little less given to the same vice, is of no importance, one way or other. Each city has the duty of caring in a peculiar manner for itself; and, on this ground, what the Glasgow authorities have to do, is, to consider by what prudent means the great reproach can be removed from amongst them. Having always felt a warm interest in Glasgow looking, indeed, on its rapid rise, its great energy, and its wealth, as something marvellous and to be proud of, in a country which was so poor and backward as Scotland was a century ago- we cannot be supposed to

refer to the present subject in an invidious spirit. Our object would be to aid in curing a great evil, of which all have occasion to be ashamed.

It has been remarked in favor of the western capital, that its population is substantially different from that of Edinburgh and London; but when we take the similar city of Manchester, where it appears, from a newspaper report, that the annual captures of drunk and disorderly persons by the police are only 523, or one in six hundred, we see that this forms no sound defence.

The comparative drunkenness of both Edinburgh and Glasgow, in contrast with southern cities, appears to us a subject eminently worthy of consideration and inquiry. It cannot be pretended that the means of education, or of impressing the religious and moral feelings, are wanting in either city. It is indeed said that these are most abundant in the more drunken city. How comes it that, while the external life and professions of so many are decent, there are at the same time so many who are given up to a shameful career of intemperance? It shows a sad want of what we would call moral coherence and unity in these populations, raising the idea that there must now be vast numbers of people in our large towns who are not reached by any of the existing means of discipline, or rather, may be said to stand in antagonism to all such appliances. These are unhealthy traits of our social state, and we hope they will receive attention, with a view to some remedial measure, instead of being sheltered from public discussion.

Since the above was in type, some revised statistics have appeared, by which it would seem that the manner in which the cases of drunkenness coming under the cognizance of the police of Edinburgh and Glasgow have been recorded, leaves some reason for doubt as to which of the two cities occupies the least favorable position. But the matter in its whole aspect remains pretty much as it was, and in any point of view is deserving of the enlightened consideration which we have craved for it.