Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 9.djvu/745

 REVIEWS 721

Again, our author wrongly assumes a force and specificness in "inherited psychic nature" (congenital heredity) such that a fair trial of it would be to rear a Japanese infant in an American home and expect it to show Japanese peculiarities of grammar, salutation, and art. On the contrary, heredity is fairly conceived only as a subtle tendency, not impelling, but only inclining such an infant to choose Japanese rather than American ways in case he spent, say, alternate days in a family of each nationality.

Finally, the reviewer cannot better commend the book for attention than by expressing his purpose to reread it throughout, weighing each case for the testimony it may give on the ever vital problem of human progress.

EDMUND BUCKLEY. THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO.

The Relations between Freedom and Responsibility in the Evolu- tion of Democratic Government. By ARTHUR TWINING HAD- LEY, President of Yale University. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. Pp. 175. $i.

EVERY serious reader will agree that the merits of this book entitle President Hadley to the gratitude of his fellow-citizens. It is mental and moral tonic from first page to last. It packs into narrow space more thought than is usually found in works of much greater bulk, even if they are addressed to specialists. It is so condensed that it might almost be described as a series of theorems which, if devel- oped, would constitute a system of social philosophy. It seems impos- sible that many hearers, even in New Haven, could have grasped the force of the reasoning from oral delivery. Read deliberately, it is both luminous and stimulating in a rare degree. The book deserves to be used as a compendium of texts to be expanded and illustrated by educated middlemen who can enlighten public opinion. It is radi- calism of the sort that goes deep enough always to rest on conservative foundations. It handles vital social problems without a trace of par- tisanship, yet with the force of an indictment to which partisans of all shades must plead. It sounds a clear call for arbitration of public issues before tribunals of higher rank than those to which petty personal interests appeal. There is not a querulous note in the whole discus- sion. It calls a spade a spade, but it always sees use for that rough tool as well as for the electric lamp or the sugar tongs. It is construc- tive criticism of the best type. In a thoroughly sane and heartening