tical necessities of the state. The preambles of the statutes were filled with complaints against the disorder, crime, and idleness caused by drunkenness, and the legislators were dealing with the liquor traffic as an enemy of social peace. But, as the authors point out, these efforts were constantly thwarted by the utilization of the business for purposes of revenue, and by the governmental policy of encouraging the great brewing and distilling industries. Parliament began the work of regulation in 1495 by an act which empowered any two justices of the peace to close up a public house or take the surety of the keeper for his good behavior. The licensing system was introduced in 1552 by a statute which required all ale-house keepers to hold a license from the justices of the peace. By implication, the local magistrates were invested with discretionary powers as to the conditions of the license, subject, of course, to royal proclamations and the strong administrative supervision of the Privy Council, which lasted until broken down by the Civil War. Under James I, an elaborate system of strict control was devised, but at the end of the seventeenth century a period of general laxness began, and the justices apparently made no attempt to keep down the number of houses. This conclusion of the authors is entirely borne out by Hamilton, in his Devonshire Quarter Sessions, a work which they have apparently not used. Drunkenness increased enormously and the government encouraged the liquor industry by several favorable statutes. In 1702, Parliament, finding that the license system was "a great hindrance to the consumption of English brandies," so far repealed the law as to permit distillers to open retail houses at will, and the result was "a perfect pandemonium of drunkenness." The excesses resulted in a reaction, and in 1729 and 1736 Parliament adopted a strong restrictive policy of high license and heavy taxation on the retail trade. The law was so stringent, however, that it defeated its purpose; the consumption of liquor increased, and the government lost its revenues. In 1743, Parliament passed an act designed to secure a revenue from the manufacture and requiring liquor dealers to have licenses issued at a small fee. This measure was followed by a number of minor acts limiting the discretion of the justices and directly regulating the conditions under which the trade was to be carried on. The result was a decrease in illicit business, a rapid growth in the number of licenses, and a notorious laxity in the control of the traffic generally. Wide-spread debauchery was again followed by a reform movement, which has apparently received no attention from other historians of the period. This movement, initiated in 1786–87 and supported by a royal proclamation against vice and immorality, in

cluded the adoption, by benches of magistrates in different parts of the country, of such devices as the refusal of new licenses, the withdrawal of licenses from badly conducted houses, and in some cases, even the establishment of a system of local option, all without the slightest idea of compensation. This policy steadily decreased the number of licenses in the face of a growing population and was accompanied by a reduction in the amount of crime and social disorder. The practice of restriction, however, soon awakened a violent opposition based on philosophic radicalism and a general dislike of the monopoly which the system fostered. A series of Parliamentary investigations beginning with 1816 resulted in a report against the control of the liquor business by the justices of the peace. Disregarding entirely all questions as to the social effects of their legislation, Parliament in 1830 passed a bill providing that any rate-payer could open his house as a beer shop without a justice's license or control on payment of two guineas to the local excise office. The effect was instantaneous; in less than six months 24,342 new beer shops were opened and, according to Sydney Smith, the sovereign people was in a beastly state. Crime and social disorder spread rapidly, and even "the optimistic prophecy that an increased consumption of beer would be accompanied by a permanent reduction in dram-drinking was completely falsified" (p. 119). In spite of protests from every side, the Whig doctrinaires refused to return to the restrictive policy. At this point, Mr. and Mrs. Webb close their research, but they append a general survey of the recent legislation. The "free-trade" policy continued in force until 1869, when a modified license system for beer houses was re-established and licensed premises again brought under the control of the justices of the peace, subject to certain limitations on their discretion in refusing licenses. In 1874 the closing hours were fixed by Parliament; in 1886 the sale of liquor to children for consumption on the premises was forbidden, and in 1901 all sales to children were required to be in sealed vessels. The authors end their account by calling attention to the fact that the present tendency of liquor legislation is in the direction of greater control by local government authorities. They defer general conclusions until they have made more exhaustive researches. The book is a valuable contribution to the history of the liquor traffic and displays a scientific calm sadly needed in the discussion of temperance questions.

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY.

CHARLES BEARD.

The Policy and Administration of the Dutch in Java. By CLIVE DAY, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Economic History in Yale University. New York, The Macmillan Co., 1904. — xxi, 434 pp.

Professor Day's book is an attempt to give a critical history of the Dutch policy and administration in Java from the earliest days of Dutch settlement in the island to the present time. The book is a valuable one, because there is practically no literature on the subject in the English language of a date subsequent to about 1860 and because the literature of a date precedent to 1860 is of a decidedly sketchy and non-comprehensive character. Professor Day not only covers the entire history of the island during the Dutch occupation, but explains the peculiarities of the Dutch colonial system by showing that they are largely a development of conditions existing in the island before the arrival of the Dutch.

One of the most marked results which the book achieves is the proof it furnishes that the vaunted culture system, when it was at its height of prosperity, was little removed from slavery and involuntary servitude, and that, in addition to the evils which are incident to such a method of solving the labor question, the culture system was accompanied by the disadvantages which attach to any system of governmental regulation of industry. Professor Day regards Money's book, Java, or How to Govern a Colony — which up to this time has been regarded as the best authority both on the culture system and on the general subject of Javanese administration as inaccurate in its details and misleading in the general impressions which it conveys. Money apparently relied for his information very largely upon the impressions which he received during his stay in Java and from conversations with administrative officers and planters, whose interests were connected with a retention and development of the culture system. Professor Day asserts that the statements which Money makes are not borne out by the Dutch documents which form the basis of his own work.

Professor Day has apparently relied entirely on an investigation of the documentary literature of Javanese administration, and has not supplemented his investigation by a personal examination of the conditions of the island. He makes no mention, either in his preface or in the main body of the work, of any visit to Java. It is much to be regretted that he was unable to make such a visit; for, however careful an examination one may make of documents, the impression one gets in this way is apt to be almost as one-sided as that which is obtained merely from a visit. At the same time, all those interested in colonial

problems, and particularly in the problems arising in tropical colonies, owe Professor Day a debt of gratitude for his careful, laborious and exhaustive study of the sources of information accessible to the European student. His is by far the best book upon the administration of Java which has appeared in the English language.

F. J. G.

Mazzini. By BOLTON KING. London, J. M. Dent & Co.; New York, E. P. Dutton & Co.; 1902. - xv, 380 pp.

This is a volume in the series of Temple Biographies. The aim of the series, as explained in the preface by the editor, Mr. D. Macfadyen, is first, in a general way to contribute to that view of the relation of biography to history which was illustrated by Plutarch and Carlyle, and second, to emphasize the importance of those "men of the spirit," who have stimulated by their idealism movements which they lacked the practical wisdom to make successful.

There can be no room to doubt that Mazzini falls well within the scope of the series. He was easily chief of the host of political and social idealists, visionaries and fanatics who pervaded Europe-and indeed America-between 1815 and 1870. Personally, he was perhaps the most interesting of them all. To absolute unselfishness in his association with his fellows was added a lofty religious and moral enthusiasm and a high sensitiveness to the noblest influences of art and literature. He could and in some degree did play a creative rôle in these last fields of spirituality. But the bent of his fancy was very early turned to politics, where fancy plays its strangest pranks, and for forty years he harped incessantly upon the single chorda unified Italy under a republican government.

That Mazzini contributed anything but persistent obstruction to the actual attainment of Italian unity, not even his biographer seems disposed to maintain. Mr. King tells the story of his various enterprises with fairness and skill, and in some cases with much sympathy. The Mazzinian philosophy also is set forth with probably more coherence than its own creator could have given to it. The net result of the whole book is, however, to give new confirmation to the view that a man of Mazzini's disposition ought to keep out, or be kept out, of political activities. Let him expend the uncontrollable force of his genius and emotions in founding a new religion or a new cult in music or some other art; the reforming of states and governments calls for

qualities that are not his. No significant loss to the sum total of human happiness ensued upon the publication of Mazzini's dreams and fancies about music and literature, but deep misery was brought upon millions of human beings by his unbalanced and irrational attempts to revolutionize Italy. Universal experience shows us, indeed, that agitators are inevitable, if not indispensable, in political progress. But no experience shows that humanity is more true to itself in eulogizing the fanatical agitator than in praising the sane statesman. In the long run history must revere not John Brown, but Abraham Lincoln, not Giuseppe Mazzini, but Camillo di Cavour.

W. A. D.

The Politics of Aristotle, with an Introduction, two Prefatory Essays and Notes Critical and Explanatory. By W. L. NEWMAN, Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford, The Clarendon Press, 1887 and 1902. Four volumes, xx, 580; lxvii, 418; xlvi, 603; lxx, 708 pp.

In the body of writings that has come down to us under the name of Aristotle a prominent place is held by a work on the state Πολιτικά - known among English-speaking scholars by the misleading title The Politics. From the point of view of subject matter one may describe the work as an account of the birth and growth of the body politic, its perfect form as imagined by the writer, the species of it that occurred in the Greek world, their pathology, and the prophylactics of their characteristic ills. This involves a discussion of the household, a criticism of preceding political theories (particularly Plato's), the exposition of general principles concerning the state, the question of the best form of government, the details of the ideal state (incomplete), the several forms of constitution and their decay, together with practical directions for politicians and statesmen. From the point of view of literature the Politics may be described as the result of Aristotle's lectures on the state. That it was published, at least as a whole, during the author's lifetime there is no good reason for thinking. The part dealing with the ideal state has literary finish, but it is incomplete and very likely never was completed.

The Politics has come down to us divided into eight books. That this division was made by Aristotle himself is improbable, but the division must be very ancient seemingly at least as early as the edition of Andronicus of Rhodes in the first century B.C.; for by the division into eight books we must explain the present jumbled order of the text