550 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
not to " foundation " or " origination." A quite transparent case of Mr. Ream's error is where (p. 152) he attributes the exceptional cleanliness of the Japanese to their religion, which here, as usual, he sums up as ancestor-worship. One wonders, however, why this world-wide phenomenon of religion should determine a Japanese cleanliness ; why ancestor-worshipers are not always clean, as for example the Chinese, who bathe most rarely. It seems saner to seek a cause for the unique daily bath of the Japanese in their also uniquely numerous thermal springs, which occur in no less than 388 different localities. Symbolism did indeed, in Japan as elsewhere, lead to religious bathing in rivers ; but bathing in fivers, as in ocean, was never popular in Japan until recently learned from the foreigner, whereas the thermal springs are crowded, and the daily baths at home are always taken exceedingly hot after the thermal pattern, for these have been found not only cleansing, but curing and warming, the last quality being a great merit where winters are cold and houses unheated.
Finally, the reader need not expect to meet here any adequate reference to those vices that have been fostered by religion in Japan. The concubinage, confirmed by ancestorism, is once mentioned ; and the harlotry, promoted by phallicism (the phallos was frequently found in a brothel, though not exclusively there, of course), is rele- gated to a single footnote. But such matters can be learned else- where, whereas the close and frequent points of influence which religion exercised upon politics and morality in Japan can nowhere else be so well studied as here.
EDMUND BUCKLEY.
THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO.
L 'anarchic et Ic collectivisme. By ALFRED NAQUET. Paris : E. Sansot, 1904. Pp. 250. Fr. 3.50.
We need not present the author, his name being known through- out the world as that of a great politician, a learned chemist, and a profound philosopher. The name alone makes us anticipate a notable work. And so, indeed, it is. It has never been our fortune to read a more earnest, a deeper, or a more moderate as well as sympathetic criticism of anarchism, or, rather, of anarchistic communism.
M. Naquet has undertaken to examine and criticise the doctrine of anarchistic communism, comparing it with the doctrine of col-
