THE AM ERIC AX JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
are arranged under several hundred heads, with a page reference to the full title in the author list. A notable and valuable feature of the work is the space given to publications which have served as the organs of socialistic parties and communistic experiments. The con- tents of these are given in full. In the present state of bibliographical science, omissions are unavoidable. But I have discovered no impor- tant omissions of English books from the Bibliographic des Socialis- mus und Communismus, and believe that it approximates quite closely to completeness.
The title of the second work, Bibliographic der Socialpoiitik, is ambiguous. The preface defines it only in the most general way. It will be found to contain a class of literature best described to Ameri- cans as that dealing with movements for social reform and ameliora- tion. Indeed, it seems to me that the phrase " social reform " might be used in its title with even more propriety than in the recently published Rncychpedia of Social Reform, That the term Socialpoiitik has no other content than this in Stammhammer's work is shown by the works which he lists under this specific head in the index. We find the following writings in Knglish : Brooks, J. G., Patriarchal vs. Social Remedies; Channing, W. E., Works; Edwards, C., The Policy of Labor ; Jevons, W. S., Methods of Social Reform; Observations on Political and Social Reform; Sullivan, E., Ten Chapters on Social Reform. The Social Economist enjoys the distinction of being the only English magazine listed under this head.
In a work covering so broad a field important omissions are to be expected. We find them, few under some topics, wholesale under others. Under heads relating to social reform in general, and to labor, they appear to be few. I have noticed the omission among Knglish books of: Gibbins, English Social Reformers; McNeill, Labor Movement; Toynbee, Industrial Revolution in England; Woods, Eng- lish Social Movements. But for a bibliography which lays special emphasis on " poverty," " charity," and " benevolence," in all countries, the omissions in American literature in this field are painful. We find no mention in the author list of the names, Hale, Henderson, Lowell, Sanborn, Warner, Wines. No articles are listed from Charities Review or Lend a Hand, none from the Proceedings of the National Conference of Charities and Corrections.
Although, in general, Stammhammer's two publications are exclu- sive as regards each other, there seems to be a little uncertainty as to
