sance and the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries; but reserving the greater part of the volume for the Revolution, the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth, always mentioning what is necessary, omitting nothing that is essential in the periods he most leaves in the shadow, and introducing no useless detail in the portions he most amplifies. By this sense of proportion and choice, M. Reinach attained his purpose, which was to make known the development of the French nation and her genius and civilization, not only by insisting upon the characteristics of each epoch and the accidents of the evolution, but also upon the permanence of a certain base and the continuance of a certain progress.

In this presentation of our successes and our disasters, our struggles against other nations, our internal divisions, the successive and contradictory orientations in our ideals and the often violent revolutions in our political and social organization, the moderation and impartiality of the historian are much to be admired. And what is still more meritorious in an adherent of a party, involved during forty years in all our political agitations, he speaks calmly and fairly of his adversaries. Neither omitting mention of the services rendered by the old monarchy to France, nor belittling them, he knows how to be just toward the first and second Empires. Opposed neither to the men on the Right, nor to those on the Extreme Left, nor to Clemenceau, he was never tempted to make reprisals. A little ardor -well justified, by the way-in speaking of Gambetta, that is all that enables one to judge on which side of the barricade was the historian.

In this intelligent, well-constructed and profoundly honest book a foreigner will learn what he should know of France, he will draw this knowledge from the resources of an intelligence which is deeply penetrated with the part played by our nation and her aspirations. Above all, for the half-century since 1870, concerning which we have so few good compilations, this work of M. Reinach will give a very clear and complete picture of French effort.

UNIVERSITY OF Paris.

GUSTAVE LANSON.

Government and Politics of France. By EDWARD M. Sait. Yonkers-on-Hudson, World Book Company, 1920.-xv, 478 pp.

Karely does a reviewer find so much to praise, so little to condemn, as in Professor Sait's book on French government and politics.

In less than five hundred pages, some of them brilliantly written and all of them readable, this handy little volume presents an extraordinarily accurate and well-balanced picture of French political life. By its style it commends itself to that more or less imaginary person, the "general reader", and at the same time it is admirably suited for use as a college textbook or as a reference work. For the latter purposes, the very complete index and the classified critical bibliography appended to the text will be found particularly valuable.

Like Viscount Bryce's Modern Democracies, this book is essentially realistic. In approaching his task, Professor Sait takes the viewpoint that "all political institutions must ultimately be judged, as Bismarck contended, not by the test of theory, but by the test of practical results" (p. 22). Hence, instead of contenting himself with a formal exposition of the constitutional laws and governmental institutions, the author is at pains to show how each law, each institution, has worked and does work in practice. He portrays not merely the bony skeleton, but the living flesh and blood of the French body politic.

He begins with the constitution-the constitution drafted by Monarchists for a supposedly ephemeral Republic. The Constitution of 1875 was "unsystematic" and "fragmentary"; it was based upon "a wise acceptance of facts" rather than upon preconceived theories; but nevertheless-or should we say, therefore?-it has endured, and it has permitted "a healthy, spontaneous growth" of government outside the domain of written law. Indeed, as the author remarks, "the constitution of a country does not consist merely in a written instrument" (p. 17).

Critics of the French Constitution customarily center their strictures on the weakness and instability of the executive. Professor Sait discusses this problem temperately but trenchantly. By citation of historical incidents, as well as of juristic opinions, he proves that "the French President occupies the position of a constitutional king" (p. 31), a king who hunts rabbits but does not govern, a king, albeit, who is "by no means a superfluous ornament" (p. 64). Why the temperament of "the Tiger" was "unsuited to the rarefied atmosphere of the Élysée" (p. 67) will be clear enough to the reader who has perused Chapter II. The cabinet, rather than the President, is the real executive. And the instability of the cabinet, while partially ascribable to constitutional defects, is mainly due to the many-party system (p. 86). However, though cabinets may come and go at the average rate of one every ten months, some of

the ministers of an outgoing cabinet are held over five times out of six, and there is considerable continuity both of personnel and of policy. Such continuity, unfortunately, is not sufficient to obviate certain practical disadvantages of frequent ministerial changes. Responsibility is dissipated. Legislation suffers interruption; for instance, eight different income-tax bills were conceived but to be still-born, down to 1914. And furthermore, ministers enjoying such transitory power cannot effectively guide the administrative departments. Professor Sait's chapter on the administrative rôle of the ministers throws much light on the actual meaning of that muchused and much-abused word "bureaucracy", as applied to France.

Three chapters are devoted to the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies. The former, originally intended as a bulwark of conservatism, has become a stronghold of Radicalism, but always lags behind the times, and always "represents old ideas" (p. 130). Professor Sait's observation, "It has inherited from preceding upper houses the privilege of being ignored" (p. 134), is more epigrammatic than true. The Senate, like the British House of Lords, has seriously impeded democratic and social progress. The Chamber of Deputies, so " statistics seem to show ", has actually represented, on the average, less than forty-five per cent of the voters, since 1876 (p. 148). After discussing in detail the franchise, the method of voting, and the electoral reform of 1919, Professor Sait passes to the subject of procedure in the Chamber. From a long and well-documented chapter, we are tempted to quote one remark, unfair though the selection may be: "In the French Chamber one hears speeches more often than debates, but speeches which, if a little theatrical at times and a little too reminiscent of the Athenian ecclesia, never descend to the level of the high school" (p. 194).

The remaining chapters deal with local government, political development, parties, administrative courts and ordinary courts. To a reviewer who is primarily interested in history, the chapters on political development and parties are most interesting, as the best hundredpage sketch of French political history since 1876 to be found in the English language. The author is ever judicious, although at times he reveals a slight predisposition to paint the Radicals in too soft colors. The chapters on local government and on the courts are interesting even to an historian.

PARKER THOMAS MOON.

The Age of the Reformation. By PRESERVED SMITH. New York, Henry Holt and Company, 1920.-xii, 861 pp.

One who would add another to the already long list of books on the Reformation and attempt to retell a story so often told already must needs approve himself as a thorough workman in the field and must be prepared to bring to the discussion new material or fresh viewpoint. The author meets the latter point by stating in his preface his conviction that the Reformation needs to be put "in its proper relations to the economic and intellectual revolution of the sixteenth century ". It is here that his special contribution is to lie. Dr. Smith has for long been a close student of the period. By monograph and translation, dealing especially with Luther and his movement, he has taught us during the past dozen years to expect solid, thoughtful, scholarly work from his pen. A double guarantee of careful workmanship is given by its appearance as one of the volumes of the American Historical Series under the editorship of Professor Haskins.

Opening with a brief cross-sectional view of Europe at the beginning of the century, the writer plunges into the story of the causes of the religious revolt from Rome, taking up the course of that revolt country by country. Then follow very useful chapters on the social conditions of the time, and what is termed the "capitalistic revolution". In these the author spares us the now familiar theory that the revolt from Rome was a huge frameup of the rising commercial classes the bourgeoisie and monarchy to rob the nobles of their power and privilege and the Church of its wealth, arguing rather that both religious and economic changes, while closely interacting and frequently being made use of the one by the other, had their roots far back in the past and were the culmination of forces which would have come to the surface regardless of their synchronism.

Following two chapters in which the intellectual and cultural outlook of the period is summed up, is a final chapter, very useful and interesting for students of the period, in which the author analyzes the various interpretations of the Reformation by writers. from the sixteenth century to our own day. These he groups under four main headings: (1) religious and political, (2) rationalist, (3) liberal romantic, and (4) economic and evolutionary. As Dr. Smith believes that historians are products of the times and "under the influence of their environment" (p. 703), these interpretations he finds correspond roughly to the sixteenth and seventeenth, the eighteenth,

the early nineteenth, and late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In order to fit things nicely into his scheme the author has to do some cutting and trimming. It is problematical, for example, if Professor Burr would recognize himself as the spiritual offspring of Nietzsche in his interpretation of the Reformation (p. 732).

There are appended sixty-six pages of bibliography listed by chapters, and under the chapters divided into sources and literature. One finds there an excellent guide to the materials of the subject, but it would seem that the arrangement of the titles might have been better. One feels that it is more useful for the scholar than for the general reader. There is an adequate index.

The book is written from an objective viewpoint; the writer studiously endeavors to view his material and record his findings in the spirit of the scientist rather than the partisan. This does not mean that we are treated to a colorless and dry narrative. Quite the contrary, it is replete with life and sparkle, and in the treatment of art the author forgets for a moment his usual reserve and gives looser rein to his enthusiasm. But while evidencing essential objectivity and fairness the writer is captivated by his century (cf. p. 694 et seq.). It was the period of highest appreciation of classical studies (p. 578); it was then that the modern state had its birth (p. 588); modern science had its beginnings (p. 609); and it is to this century that one must look for the true genesis of the economic changes that one has for long ascribed to a period some two centuries later. Nor does Dr. Smith leave one in doubt as to his philosophy of history. The world is improving. The words "medieval" and "scholastic" have a bad flavor (cf. pp. 668, 695); the religious revolution of the sixteenth century was a movement of progress (p. 750); the modern age, where the scientific point of view prevails, is a great advance over preceding centuries lef. p. 637 et seq.).

From the reviewer's viewpoint complete justice is scarcely done those who remained true to the old Church. We are told, for example, that in England it was the progressive and intelligent groups that revolted from the Church, and one is left with the impression that they revolted because too intelligent to remain among the number of the faithful. But the men who by the author's own testimony saw most clearly-Erasmus, More, Montaigne-remained in the old faith. His chapter on the Catholic reformation is headed still "Counter Reformation", and while he points out that deman for reform within the Church were numerous and constant, i