that few data of any accurate kind were to be had relating to it, and that all our current ideas as to the supposed evil effects of the intermarriage of civilized with uncivilized races were matters of conjecture. Mr. Bryce also points out that a Sociological Society which has as its fundamental object the study of social phenomena as a whole is in an excellent position for exhibiting the co-relation which exists between the various social sciences. Many of these sciences at the present time take little or insufficient cognizance of what is being done in other branches of social study outside their immediate sphere. The result of this comparative isolation is that we get detached studies of certain social facts and processes, but these studies are seldom pursued or presented as part of a greater whole. "A single society," says Mr. Bryce, "surveying the whole field of human phenomena ought to be able to bring all these diverse and formally unconnected yet interlacing branches into systematic coöperation." Coöperation of this character, it is believed, will lead to a more rapid advance towards the correlation and unification of all forms of knowledge bearing on man.

In Great Britain during the past century an immense amount of practical work has been done in the domain of what may be comprehensively described as philanthropy. But philanthropic effort has been to a large extent conducted without any clearly defined general aims, and sufficient account has not been taken of the fact that in the process of remedying or palliating certain admitted and glaring evils in our social system it is easy to create fresh evils of an almost equally disastrous character. Mr. Bryce considers that the best remedy for this defective state of things is to possess a sound theoretical basis for practical effort, and he considers that a Sociological Society is the most appropriate instrument for providing such a basis. In short, the sum and substance of Mr. Bryce's address is a plea for the application of the same careful rigorous scientific method in the human sciences as has been applied with such conspicuous success in the physical sciences. The fundamental presupposition is that the whole structure and development of human society is just as much under the dominion of law as the processes of inanimate nature and that the supreme task of Sociology is to discover the sociological laws which preside over the collective evolution of humanity. This it must be confessed is a task of gigantic magnitude. It is infinitely more complex and difficult than anything we meet with in the sciences of

nature.

The multiplicity of conditions which determine the growth and development of human society is so ramified and obscure that the task of discovering these conditions differentiating them, analysizing them, assigning them their proper order of importance is nothing less than stupendous. Yet this is a task which the human mind must grapple with if our knowledge of human society is to advance from an empirical to a scientific stage. These observations on Mr. Bryce's paper have left little space for dealing with some of the excellent papers in the body of the volume. These papers, we are told in the preface, may be grouped under three heads. The first group is devoted to a consideration of the History and Methodology of Sociology and includes papers on the "Origin and Use of the Word Sociology" by Mr. Victor Brandford; on the "Relation of Sociology to the Social Sciences and to Philosophy," by Mr. Brandford and Professor Durkheim; and the translation of an article contributed to the Revue Philosophique, by Professor Durkheim and M. E. Fauconnet, on "Sociology and the Social Sciences." According to Mr. Durkheim and Mr. Fauconnet, it is no use discussing in the abstract what Sociology is; Sociology, they say, exists: it is the science of social facts, and the practical and fruitful thing to do is to make ourselves acquainted with the course of its development. In the study of Sociology it is not enough to show that social facts are governed by laws; we must point out in addition that these social facts are dominated by specific laws of their own. These laws are comparable to the laws which prevail in physics and biology, but they are not to be identified with them or reduced to them; they possess a character peculiar to themselves. In these circumstances the social sciences must pursue a method of their own, and the systematization of the social sciences must be effected by a method adapted to the facts of social life.

The second group of subjects in this volume is described in the preface as "Pioneer Researches in Borderland Problems," and comprises an excellent paper by Dr. Westermarck on the "Position of Women in Early Civilization," and a contribution of equal value by Mr. Harold H. Mann on "Life in an English Agricultural Village." These interesting researches relate to special phases of social life. It is in the field of specific social ideas and social institutions that the best work in sociology will be done for many a day to come. Until the whole domain of social development has been exhaustively covered by special studies in the historic growth and

structure of social ideas and institutions it will be impossible to formulate sociological laws applicable to society as a whole. The third set of papers are termed by the editors "Applied Sociology," and consist of a paper by Mr. Francis Galton on "Eugenics," and another by Professor Geddes on "Civics." Mr. Galton's paper deals with the best methods of producing good citizens by means of a higher conception of the duty of sexual selection, and Professor Geddes's paper insists on the necessity of creating a higher type of city. Both papers are stimulating and suggestive and open up problems which the western world must face and solve if it is ultimately to produce a higher type of man and eliminate the decadent and degenerate classes which at present hamper the progress of civilization. The Sociological Society is to be congratulated on the appearance of its first volume, and it is to be hoped that a long career of usefulness and prosperity lies before it. W. D. MORRISON.

LONDON.

JUGENDLEHRE EIN BUCH FÜR Eltern, LEHRER UND GEISTLICHE. Von Dr. Fr. W. Foerster, Privatdozent für Philosophie am Eidgenössischen Polytechnikum und an der Universität Zürich. Berlin: Druck und Verlag von Georg Reimer, 1904. Pp. xvi, 724.

In this book Dr. Foerster, a practical schoolman and professor at the University of Zürich, gives as the result of his personal experience and labors, a full exposition of his ideas on the Moral Training of the Young.

In doing so, Dr. Foerster wants it clearly understood that he in nowise desires to replace religion by mere moral culture in education and life. On the contrary, he willingly acknowledges that his own pedagogical practice has strengthened in him to the utmost the faith in the undying ethical and pedagogical importance of religion.

But, as the freedom of thought and the religious liberty enjoyed in America since the Declaration of Independence become more and more established in Europe, the public schools find themselves forced, on account of the diversity of religious convictions represented in their pupils, to restrict or entirely to abandon religious instruction in their class-rooms. The conscientious German mind, however, feels itself bound to offer to the children in the schools something more than the mere training

of their intellectual faculties, and the only alternative possible seems to be a secular instruction in ethical culture.

Dr. Foerster contends that moral training can easily be given by combining it with the different branches of learning usually sought in public schools; and he shows in a separate chapter of his book, how this can be done. He nevertheless insists that such instruction is not sufficient, and pertinently asks: "Would you call it the right thing to teach history only by occasional interspersions in the lessons on geography or literature or languages?" But just as little ought we to restrict to mere incoherent flashlights that one branch which has above all others to represent and to cultivate the higher unity of all human endeavors. This is, no doubt, a weakness in our otherwise excellent American public school system; and well may we welcome any help which may be offered us to overcome this defect.

In explaining how the problem of giving moral training in the public schools can best be solved, Dr. Foerster calls attention to the fact, often overlooked, that each healthy child rebels by its very nature against subordination and self-sacrifice, and that it is therefore not sufficient either to tell the children what is demanded of them or to put lofty examples before them, but the teacher has to enlist the coöperation of the child. Dr. Foerster thinks that many mistakes of the former kind have been made and are continually being made in the religious instruction of the young, and he shows how the same mistake has been made in many attempts at promoting moral culture in the public school. He refers especially to a number of books used in France, in which the children are told what to do, as, e. g., in a chapter on the duties toward parents: (1) You must love your parents; (2) you must honor your parents; (3) you must obey your parents; (4) you must not dispute with your parents; (5) you must trust your parents, etc. "Can such a collection of moral precepts," he asks, "really be called moral instruction?" Dr. Foerster correctly observes that mere knowledge of moral precepts never affects a deep ethical culture. You must not proceed from the precept, but from the child. Study the real world of the child and find in its character those tendencies which are related to that exertion of the will which you intend to call forth, and then the only thing necessary for you to do is to put these relations in the right light by a skilful and well-adapted presentation.

How this can be done is shown by Dr. Foerster in a number

of chapters dealing with such problems as school life and moral pedagogy, the preparation of the teacher, ethical instruction in the school, the future of the moral training of the young, sexual pedagogy, objections and difficulties, the punishment of children, etc. But the manner in which this difficult problem of moral training can most effectively be accomplished is explained by the author by an abundance of striking examples from daily life, constituting by far the bulk of his book. The enumeration of the topics illustrated fills four pages of the index. It would be difficult to find any relation of man to man which has not been touched upon.

The character of the illustrations used may best be shown by citing one example under the topic Responsibility.

The Cudgel Boy. "I once read that it used to be the custom at the royal court in France, that whenever a young prince had committed a wrong or been lazy, he never was punished himself, but one of his companions was selected, and this boy received in the presence of the prince the punishment which the latter had deserved. The purpose evidently was to influence the young prince for good by letting him hear the piteous screams of his innocent companion.

"Shall I now call your attention to the fact that each one of you has such a cudgel boy or cudgel girl? The only real difference between you and the French prince is that he heard the screams, whereas most of you are so deaf that you do not hear, even if the thing occurs in your own room. Don't you believe me? Well, then, tell me, do you really believe that anyone can commit any wrong or be guilty of any carelessness in this world, without someone having to suffer for it, even if the wrongdoer himself escapes entirely unhurt?

"If you, e. g., use a filthy word, you may depend upon it that someone catches it up and makes use of it at home and gets a 'thrashing' for it. Or he is impaired by the evil influence it has upon him, it lowers the moral tone of his character and becomes thus an obstacle in his life. You do not hear his screaming nor see his misfortune, and yet he is your cudgel boy. Or you are unclean and disorderly. It may be that you do not get the punishment for it; but others have been infected by your example and become negligent and have to suffer for it. And besides this, others will have to put in order what you have neglected to do, and will have to clean what you have soiled; and thus they