Moore says: "The United States while freely admitting the belligerent right of search, denied that it might be employed for any but the acknowledged purposes of enforcing blockade, seizing prize goods, and perhaps capturing officers and soldiers in the actual service of the enemy." After much controversy, lasting from 1812 to 1861, Lord Russell declared in the famous Mason and Slidell case that such seizures were violations of international law; and Mr. Seward, in releasing the prisoners taken from the British mail steamer "Trent" by the American man-of-war "San Jacinto," wrote to the British Minister, Lord Lyons, congratulating himself upon defending and maintaining "an old, honored, and cherished American tradition."

It was the United States that took the initiative in the abolition of the tolls enforced by Denmark from the ships of all nations passing the famous castle of Kronberg, which is Shakespeare's castle of Elsinore. Our government held that the natural channels leading from one sea to the other must be free. The Danes declared that the right of levying dues in the Oresund-the path from the Baltic to the North Sea-had been theirs from time immemorial. Apparently, it was as old as the story of Hamlet told by Saxo Grammaticus. But our government took no note of time; a European conference was called; the dues were capitalized; and the Oresund was made free for all. An artificial channel joining two seas opened another question; this was dealt with in the Bulwer-Clayton treaty.

It was, as we all know, on January 31, 1917, that the imperial German government struck the tremendous blow at the doctrine of the freedom of the seas, which may be justly called American. It had announced that all ships in certain zones of the high seas would be sunk without any precautions being taken for the safety of the persons on board, "and without the exercise of visit and search." The logical consequence was the joint resolution of Congress of April 6, 1917. Approved by the President, the resolution announced the formal declaration of war.

Dr. Moore says that "among the rules of conduct prescribed for the United States by the statesmen who formulated its foreign policy, none was conceived to be more fundamental or more distinctly American than that which forbade intervention in the political affairs of other nations." These words open a remark

ably clear chapter on "Non-Intervention and the Monroe Doctrine." Dr. Moore has a fortunate habit of illuminating his text by quotations that make high lights for his statements. "You are afraid," said Richard Oswald to John Adams, "of being made the tool of the powers of Europe." "Indeed, I am," said Adams. "What powers?" inquired Oswald. "All of them," replied Adams. "It is obvious that all the powers of Europe will be continually manoeuvring with us to work us into their real or imaginary balances of power. But I think it ought to be our rule not to meddle." The policy of the United States as to non-intervention appliesthough sectarian delegations to the White House or to congressional committees sometimes seem to forget this to religion as well as to foreign policies. With the approval of Washington, the following words appeared in the text of the treaty between the United States and Tripoli: "As the Government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity of Mussulmen, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

The situation in 1913, when President Wilson made his statement to the Latin-American nations, at which some of them took fire, was a prelude to the policy of our government towards Mexico. The analysis of this apparently new aspect of our policy makes some of the most interesting pages in Dr. Moore's history. Misunderstood, or badly interpreted, this policy might lead to constant dissensions among the nations to the south that rejoice with us in the name of American. Its proper use by the United States, which proclaimed it on her own authority, will remove the uncertainties existing among the Latin-American states as to her procedure, and will cement, as President Wilson says, "the foundations of amity so that no one will hereafter doubt them."

An old-fashioned Southern book-dealer said the other day: "When I want to take a book from my stock to read over Sunday, I never choose a new one. I always look to see whether a book has been reprinted within three or four years after its publication, and when I find one of that kind, I reckon it's a good book." Careful readers and in the multiplicity of books, care is advisableneed not take this precaution in regard to Dr. Hill's and Dr. Moore's latest volumes. MAURICE FRANCIS EGAN.

Washington, D. C.

RUSSIAN REVOLUTIONS AND LITERATURE

The Eclipse of Russia, by E. J. Dillon, $4, Doran. The Soul of the Russian Revolution, by Moissaye J. Olgin, $2.50; Our Revolution, by Leon Trotzky, translated by M. J. Olgin, $1; Holt. Inside the Russian Revolution, by Rheta Childe Dorr, $1.25; The Dark People, by Ernest Poole, $1.50; Czech Folk Tales, translated by J. Baudis, $1.35; The Gambler and Other Stories, by F. Dostoevsky, translated by C. Garnett, $1.50; The Wife and Other Stories, by Anton Chekhov, translated by C. Garnett, $1.50; Macmillan. A Diary of the Russian Revolution, by James L. Houghteling, Jr., $1.25, Dodd, Mead. The Rebirth of Russia by Isaac F. Marcosson, $1.25, Lane. Russia in Upheaval, by Edward A. Ross, $2.50; In the World, by Maxim Gorky, translated by G. M. Foakes, $2; Century. A Russian Gentleman; A Russian Schoolboy, by Serge Aksakoff, translated by J. D. Duff, $2.40 each, Longmans, Green. The Diaries of Leo Tolstoy (Youth), translated by C. J. Hogarth and A. Sirnis, $2.00, Dutton. The Journal of Leo Tolstoi (Vol. 1), translated by R. Strunsky, $2.00, Knopf. Tolstoy, by George Rapall Noyes, $1.50, Duffield. The House with the Mezzanine and Other Stories, by Anton Tchekoff, translated by S. S. Koteliansky and G. Cannan, $1.35, Scribners. Russian Realities and Problems, by Paul Milyoukov and Others, $1, Cambridge University Press. Tales of the Revolution, by Michael Artzibashef, translated by P. Pinkerton, $1.50, Huebsch. Feodor Vladimir Larrovitch, edited by W. G. Jordan and R. Wright, $2.00, The Authors Club. New York. Turgenev, by Edward Garnett, Heinneman, London. 1917-1918.

One day, more than eighty years ago, when Gogol and Pushkin were talking together, the great poet exclaimed, "God! what a sad country is Russia!" There seems to be no good reason for modifying this statement in 1918. From the abominable tyranny of the Tsardom, Russia has escaped into the abominable rule of the mob. And over the socialistic twitterings hovers the German hawk.

Looking back on the last four years, it seems strange that for more than a century powerful nations have been afraid of Russia. The Japanese pricked the balloon, but the Bolsheviki deflated it, and all over the once dreaded empire may now be heard, not the rushing of a mighty wind, but the sound of escaping hot air.

It is appalling to think what a prodigious amount of nonsense has risen from Russian throats since March, 1917. At this moment in every part of that bewildered land there are gathered

together excited groups, each man shouting at the top of his voice, and the others paying no more attention than is given to the chronicler of bad luck at golf. But as out of the madness of the French Revolution came a wave of liberty and progress washing clean many filthy highways of the world, so we must hope that out of this Russian debauch of freedom future generations may obtain permanent profit. I believe the present chaos inevitable, and the future gain certain.

No one can read any of these books on the recent struggle in Russia and retain much intellectual respect for the late Nicholas Romanov. When we contemplate able statesmen trying to humor the Tsar's caprices, it is as though on a ship driven by fierce storms, the officers, before undertaking any manoeuvre, should be obliged to consult patiently and reverently the whims of a selfish child. But absolute democracy is as futile as absolute monarchy; for now it is as though on the same ship, no move can be made until every deckhand and stoker has cast his vote, the majority to decide. If Lenine and Trotzky are in German pay, which has not been proved, they are knaves and traitors, and deserve a traitor's fate. But if, as a correspondent in "The New Republic" admiringly insists, they believe in real rather than in sham democracy and by real he means counting noses-then they are conspicuously unfit to rule. For true democracy ought to mean that the people are represented by the ablest men, that the country shall be governed not by numerical sentiment alone, but by the best sentiment available. The best and ablest men, even though elected by the people and responsible to the people, will not blindly follow public opinion; they will lead it. And in a true democracy, the members of the minority have the right to live.

Yet it certainly is not fair to blame exclusively the present Russian Left for the disgraceful scenes of to-day, any more than it is fair to lay the whole blame of the Reign of Terror in France on the mob. The causes of the national smash in each instance are found in the myopic cruelty of the rulers of the preceding two centuries. They sowed the wind, with the logical harvest.

The present situation seems so desperate that Dr. Dillon calls his book "The Eclipse of Russia." This writer was born in Ireland. His father was Irish, his mother English, his wife Russian.

He studied comparative philology in France, Germany, Russia, was professor in the 'eighties in a Russian university, and for many years was St. Petersburg correspondent of "The London Daily Telegraph." He had unrivalled opportunities to become familiar with the inside history of Russian politics from 1880 to 1917, and has here published an immense amount of detailed information, diaries, secret messages, confidential conversations; any reader will find enough material here to disgust him with secret diplomacy for the rest of his life. This book of over four hundred pages is too long; extreme haste in composition and proofcorrecting is shown by constant repetitions and many typographical errors; but it is the most valuable work on the Revolution that has thus far appeared, and all those who have any interest, not only in Russia, but in international politics will find it full of meat. The hero is Witte, who was a popular hero in America at the time of the Russo-Japanese peace settlement. The whole story of that remarkable episode is told here, and the conversations that Witte had with the German Emperor on his way home are fully reported. If any American still doubts that Kaiser Wilhelm II planned world domination, he ought to read this volume. Furthermore, despite unnecessary verbosity and type errors, the author has no difficulty in steadily holding the reader's attention. Another big monograph, and curiously enough, of exactly the same length as Dr. Dillon's, 423 pages, is "The Soul of the Russian Revolution," by M. J. Olgin. Its value is enhanced by the reproduction of many revolutionary cartoons; and the history of the Duma from its first meeting to its last is told with vivacity. The writer has more sympathy with the extreme revolutionists than will be found in Dr. Dillon's pages, and certainly more faith in their ability to govern Russia. But it should be remembered that he wrote in 1917, and many things have happened since then. He concerns himself mainly, as his title page indicates, with the spirit of freedom in Russia, and he acts as interpreter to the American people. Trotzky's essays, which Mr. Olgin translates in a separate and small volume, cover the period 19041917. They afford an opportunity to study the mind of this radical, and to me indicate that Trotzky is better fitted to lead an opposition party than to assume responsibility of government. Professor Ross has written an exceedingly interesting and