much need of a deep and genuine religious preparation for the discharge of all the more important duties of citizenship" (p. 178).
9. We need to consider the relation of the individual to public opinion (pp. 191–215.) "The force which we describe as public opinion is not always wise when it is strong. . . . . If it were the aggregate thought of the whole multitude it would be less likely to go astray; the concentrated passion of the multitude is not so safe a guide (p. 203).
10. We need to detect modern Pharisaism (pp. 219–241). "Pharisaism was the deification of detail, the apotheosis of the trivial. It put so much stress upon minutiæ that no weight was left for things momentous" (p. 227).
11. We need to overcome irrational partisanship. "A good share of the disputes about social reform that are always filling the air arise from the fact that some persons see one side of this question very clearly and refuse to see the other; and about an equal number are equally perverse in their determination to stand and look on the opposite side of the shield" (p. 262).
The postulates upon which these claims rest are (a) the immanence of Christ (p. 274); (b) human relations are not contractual, but vital and organic (p. 285); (c) the presence of the kingdom of God (p. 289).
This extended notice is due because an occasional book of this quality is of more social and perhaps sociological consequence than dozens of purely scientific treatises.
Anarchy or Government? An Inquiry in Fundamental Politics. By William M. Salter. T. Y. Crowell & Co. 16mo., pp. 176, 75 cents.
A genial and wholesome discussion of etymological and ideal anarchy, rather than of the ugly reality that bears the name. Mr. Salter finds that "anarchy" and "liberty " are practically synonymous; that in a society of thoroughly good men compulsion which limits liberty would be unnecessary; hence anarchy is ideally possible and desirable; that in view of this desirability of liberty or anarchy the practical problem of government is: How far may a community or society use force in attaining its objects? The author's answer to the question is that government is justified in maintaining defensive war, in protecting life and property, and in promoting the higher ends of
