menacing forces were gathered to dispute its authority. One is reminded of Professor Fletcher's History of England, which he terminated in 1815 because (as he explained) he did not approve of what had happened since that time and had not the heart to follow the life of his hero Castlereagh to its inglorious close. Complaint of this kind, however, would apply with equal force to other constitutional histories; and none of them will be found so serviceable both to those who are approaching a study of the subject for the first time and to those who, brought up on the old theology, want to know how the faith stands under the attacks of higher criticism.

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

E. M. SAIT

La Tradition socialiste en France et la Société des Nations. By J. L. PUECH. Paris, Garnier Frères, 1921.-228 pp.

Ever since Marx's exhortation, "Workers of the world, unite ", socialism has hewn through boundary lines to an international ideal. The opponents of socialism have ordinarily regarded this ideal as one, not of peace, but of war-in which the workingmen of the world will confederate to tread down a helpless bourgeoisie. But such a conception, if held at all, is entirely subordinated by the French Utopists whose theories concerning international organization have been gathered together in the volume under review. All of them look forward to an era of peace, industrial and moral, where violence will be unknown.

In 1814 Saint-Simon wrote his De la Réorganisation de la société européenne. In order to secure international peace, three steps, he said, were necessary. France and England should first be united under a common parliament; then the other nations of Europe should be persuaded to adopt the parliamentary form of government; and finally, a European parliament should be established. This parliament should be supreme over all national governments with power to judge differences between them; it should have the taxing power; it should undertake the construction of great public works, such as European canals; and it should direct European education, in order that a common system of morality should become general. Every million voters should have the right to choose four representatives to this parliament-a business man, a scholar, a magistrate, and an administrator. Finally, there should be a European king.

Saint-Simon's followers endeavored to develop this idea of a European state by emphasizing the necessity of its having a spiritual basis. Enfantin declared that association rather than gravitation was the universal law and that a new religion was necessary to commingle the love of humanity with the love of God.

Charles Fournier, the next socialist whom M. Puech discusses, based his ideas of internationalism on his theories of internal society. The "passional attraction" should lead men to associate themselves in self-sacrificing phalanges, which in turn are to be formed into a world federation, with Constantinople as its capital. When this ideal of internationalism is realized, "Harmony" will succeed to "Civilization". Considerant, one of Fourier's followers, emphasized the economic factor in peace by saying that "reason alone cannot vanquish war, but, in order to succeed in this, it is necessary that it support itself upon Interests created by Industry ".

Perhaps the most interesting of these writers is Constantin Pecqueur, who in 1842 wrote De la Paix, de son principe et de sa réalisation, and later La République de Dieu. Perceiving the moral aspect of internationalism, he declared that education was necessary to secure peace and that world organization could be brought about only by the application of the principles of Labor and Love. Likewise "the complete and universal abolition of the system of protection" was necessary to secure peace. But he makes the interesting remark that free trade can be instituted only by an international organization with power to control national industrial interests. He was fully aware also that nations must sacrifice part of their sovereignty, if any form of international society is to succeed. A common parliament and an international court of justice should be established. Common taxes should be levied and international banks established.

Of the two remaining writers, Pierre Leroux was an apostle of international solidarity, based upon the recognition of man as a religious and social being and of humanity as having a higher claim on men than national patriotism. The simple play of economic laws, in his opinion, would also lead to international unity. Proudhon, the other writer, was a prophetic forerunner of those who advocate the Harding type of Association of Nations. His chief concern was to avoid the creation of a superstate, and yet at the same time secure the advantages of international cooperation. Consequently he advocated "A Federation of Peoples ", in which each nation should retain its freedom of action, but should regulate its differences with

other nations upon the basis of contract. Proudhon also insisted on the necessity of suppressing tariffs, before the alliance of peoples can become a reality, "their solidarity recognized and their equality proclaimed ".

A criticism of these different theories would necessitate a criticism, impossible here, of the whole problem of internationalism, and the economic, political, racial and religious factors which serve to complicate it. But one cannot help being struck by the emphasis which these French socialists place upon the economic basis of internationalism, especially upon the necessity of doing away with protectionism; and also by their recognition that peace is primarily a thing of the spirit, which cannot endure as long as hatred and greed are triumphant throughout the world. It is also refreshing to find, after reading Poincaré's Bar-le-Duc speech, that there have been and doubtless still are many intellectuals in France who fervently believe with Michelet that: "Au vingtième siècle, la France déclarera la Paix au monde", and that she has been commissioned to lead the world toward an international goal.

RAYMOND LESLIE BUELL

PRINCETON, N. J.

The State and the Church. By JOHN A. RYAN and MOORHOUSE F. X. MILLAR. New York, Macmillan Company, 1922.viii, 331 pp.

A Spanish cavalier, so fable tells us, once ventured forth fullarmed to slay robbers and giants and dragons. The same gallant warrior still reappears, here and there, but his name is no longer Don Quixote. A few days ago the New York World (July 14) reported that he had formed an organization to "fight Papal Rome and its hierarchy in its attempt to encroach on American institutions". To convince a Quixote that his horrendous giants are but harmless windmills is no easy task, as unimaginative Sancho Panza discovered. Most normal minds, however, would be convinced by the volume lately issued under the auspices of the Department of Social Action of the National Catholic Welfare Council by the Reverend Dr. John A. Ryan (widely known through his books on A Living Wage, Distributive Justice, and Social Reconstruction) in collaboration with the Reverend Moorhouse F. X. Millar, a learned Jesuit. Through the pages of this volume the vibrant note of Americanism sounds and resounds until, toward the close, it swells into a

full diapason. Not only does the book endeavor to show that, in Archbishop Ireland's words, "Catholicism and Americanism are in complete agreement" (p. 285); much more, the authors strive to demonstrate that for the origin of the fundamental principles of her free institutions America owes an incalculable debt to Catholicism.

Despite its somewhat uninforming, if not misleading, title, the book is really a comprehensive outline of Catholic political philosophy, with special reference to American institutions. At the very outset, the reader is confronted with Leo XIII's much-misunderstood Encyclical, "The Christian Constitution of States", with helpful explanatory notes by Dr. Ryan (ch. ii). These are followed by an extract from Cardinal Billot's De Ecclesia Christi and a heavy juristic chapter (iv) by the Reverend Charles B. Macksey, S.J., the latter leading to the palatable conclusion that "governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed". Three historical chapters (v-vii) by Father Millar trace the influence of Catholic principles in the development of the ideas upon which rest America's independence and freedom. Dr. Ryan then resumes the pen to explain, with characteristic straightforward lucidity, the Catholic view of the nature, functions and limitations of government, and the citizen's rights and duties (ch. viii-xiv). In addition there are extracts from papal Encyclicals and from a recent Pastoral Letter of the American Hierarchy, as well as addresses by Archbishop Ireland on "Catholicism and Americanism" and Archbishop Spalding on "Patriotism". Throughout the volume there runs a vein of solid liberalism, neither sentimental nor cynical, but genuine, realistic and progressive. The tone of the book as a whole is candid and scholarly. Perhaps too scholarly, for the uninitiated, are the chapters by Fathers Millar and Macksey.

Sober reasonableness characterizes all Dr. Ryan's writings. In this book, chapters ii, viii, ix and x show him at his best. He is ever doctrinal, never doctrinaire. One might look far and wide for a better brief argument against Socialism than the one he outlines in three pages (pp. 217-220) or for an abler reply to laissez-faire Individualism than he gives here (pp. 209-217). He believes in neither Socialism nor Individualism, but in a liberal democracy, in which the State aims to fulfil its true end, "to promote the welfare of its citizens, as a whole, as members of families, and as members of social classes" (p. 221) without destroying freedom and private initiative.

Because they accomplish the rare feat of couching important and

difficult ideas in plain Anglo-Saxon, Dr. Ryan's chapters will doubtless appeal to a wider circle of readers; but to scholars, especially to historians, Father Millar's hundred-page contribution will prove no less interesting. Taking as a text John Quincy Adams' statement that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution embody a theory of government which "had been working itself into the mind of man for many ages" (p. 99), the author delves far back into the Middle Ages to unearth the roots of our theories of natural law, human liberties and limited constitutional government. The medieval Scholastic theories, he shows, were developed further by the celebrated Jesuit philosophers and theologians of the sixteenth century, such as Suarez and Bellarmine. The latter not only controverted James I's arguments for "divine right" monarchy, but also maintained that "the best form of government" was a federal commonwealth under an elected chief magistrate, with locally autonomous governments for its provinces and cities (pp. 115-121). Royalists like Dryden and Filmer saw in Bellarmine the most formidable advocate of popular sovereignty (p. 134). The political principles of the Jesuits were taken over almost bodily, so the author endeavors to show, by the English Whigs, and subsequently by the American Whigs, the "fathers of the Constitution" (ch. v-vi). Many citations are given to show that the doctrines of Jefferson, Hamilton and James Wilson were in accord with, and directly or indirectly derived from, the teachings of Bellarmine and Suarez (ch. vii). James Wilson's point of view was "thoroughly Suaresian" (p. 185). Madison was probably familiar with Bellarmine's work (pp. 161162). Jefferson, circumstantial and internal evidence seems show, used Bellarmine's arguments in the composition of the Declaration of Independence. "If so, then the American denial of the omnicompetence of Parliament is no more than a reassertion of Bellarmine and Suarez' denial of the Divine Right of Kings" (PP. 177-178).

The critical reader will ask for a more exhaustive quantitative analysis of Catholic influence before granting this contention in its entirety. Nevertheless, Father Millar's scholarly researches do prove that there was a remarkable affinity between the doctrines of the Fathers and those of the Jesuit Fathers, and that both were alien to Rousseau's non-Christian philosophy and "the empty moonshine of the French Enlightenment" (p. 171). This is a distinct contribution, even though it be exaggerated. On laying the volume down, the reader feels convinced that the genealogy of freedom has cus