men and of natives during their head-hunting expeditions. Fines of so many pigs in earlier days let them to value white men in terms of pigs. The presence of a man-of-war sent them to the bush. Severe ineasures had to be adopted. According to Dr. Codrington, the Solomon Islanders are ancestor-worshipers. They put the head of a chief in a basket and house, call it a tindalo, and "believe every tindalo was once a man.' Admiral Davis destroyed these cairns or tindalos. It is evident that in so doing he was inflicting on the natives the severest punishment possible, and one which robbed them of their “natural calls for help in danger and distress."— Man, published under the direction of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, September, 1904.

H. E. F. The Ideality of the Æsthetic Feelings.-Since Schiller coined the expression “ das Ideal und das Leben” (ideal and life), “the ideality of the æsthetic feelings" has been the usual term for the effect of art. So it is customary to speak of the ideal and apparent feelings which art is producing as opposed to real feelings. It is said that art produces no feeling, but merely a representation of a feeling.

Witasek in his psychological analyses is probably the most important follower of ideality, declaring that art does not create any feelings, but merely imaginations of feelings. I maintain that in appreciating a work of art I do not only represent the feeling, but have it.

Feeling in art-appreciation is either abstract thinking, as in science, or pure feeling, vivid passionate excitement, as in ordinary life-affairs. This is a dilemma, from which there is no way out as long as we compare the effect of art and the effect of life in their totalities. But, comparing their single elements, we see that some of those in life are present in the work of art, and some are missing. The whole of the effect of art can be different from life and still be analogous.

A psychological analysis of the effect of art and the effect of life shows the wealth of feelings in our moods, and that, if our feeling depended on reality, it would never extend to nature and to fiction, concerning which we have, in fact, most feeling. Feeling does not proceed along lines so logical as to depend on reality.

It is easier to dissolve into feeling over a fantasy artistically created than over a real person. Figures of art do not touch our sphere of volition, and sympathy for their vicissitudes is selfless. Only in art can I so dissolve myself in another that the recognition of my own personality, against which the other stands as a stranger, disappears entirely, and the limit between me and the other falls and I am unified with himn. This feeling into the identification of another is the real province of art. For the robber whose adventures we are following on the stage we have this inner feeling. For the robber whose depredations call us from the theater to the street our feeling is aroused because of a real event which puts our volition to the test.

The less we are driven by art to practical, active action, the better we can give ourselves up to the feeling into the represented condition of feelings. Hence, if you separate the single elements of moment in the effects of art, feeling is not silenced by a work of art, but manifested most strongly because it does not share in any impulse of the will.- ANNA TUMARKIN, Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, Vol. V, p. 125.

H. E. F. Shortcomings in the Execution of Punishment.— The debate in the Reichstag on May 13, 1904, has passed by without action. After the enormous agitation of the press over these questions of the punishinent and reformation of criminals, this negative outcome is astonishing. But, at any rate, the public is still interested. That there are weaknesses in prison administration will not here be denied. But they are different from those emphasized by the press.

First, there is a lack of balance between the justice of the punishment and its execution. If you hold as the ideal the moral improvement of offenders, there is certainly a shortcoming when, with 75 per cent. of those held in detention for short terms of punishment, there is complete or almost complete failure to reach the end. Of punishment and moral betterment one cannot speak reasonably when the imprisonment is from one day to three months. There is only one effect from

these short terms of imprisonment; that is, to blunt the feelings concerning prisons. On the other hand, one must admit that many of the terms of imprisonment are too long for educational results. If punishment works no improvement in three or four years, it will not, generally speaking, do so in a longer period. The only result of the lengthened terms of imprisonment is to make the criminal not dangerous to public safety. On the first offense many criminals are pushed deeper and deeper into crime by a brief period of confinement in company with criminals by heredity and profession. Therefore too short imprisonments at the beginnings of their careers cause too long imprisonments later. It is contrary to sound politics to let loose criminals by birth. Here punishment must be completed by subsequent measures of safety. Colonies for obligatory work should be established.

There is enough danger of contagion in our penitentiaries. There should be less use of imprisonment. Probation, the parole, and conditional pardon should, in the cases of those not criminal by birth, be used much more than heretofore.

Adults held for investigation, and children on all arrests, should be kept under separate roofs from those sheltering confirmed criminals. For the attention of recidivists and defectives there should be a specially trained staff.

Finally, in Prussia there is a mistake in the dualism of administration. The division between the ministry of justice and the ministry of the interior brings untoward results. The prisons are too large. The number of prisoners in each should be limited to five hundred, so that the director can become acquainted with each individual.

In conclusion, however, we should say that Krobne is right in declaring that too much is expected from punishment.- Von Rouden, Zeitschrift für Socialwissenschaft, October, 1904.

H. E. F. American Charities in German Eyes. - Dr. Emil Münsterberg, president of the department of public charities of Berlin, has given an account of his impressions of American methods to the readers of Charities, preliminary to a report in his own magazine, Zeitschrift für das Armenwesen.

Dr. Münsterberg did not cease during his visit to speak with wonder of the emulsion of charity and politics which he found in every city under the name of public relief administration. "You must work earnestly against this," he said.

I cannot believe that such a condition of affairs can stand against public opinion, and it is for you to create this public opinion and take the departinents of charities, tenements, and health as much out of politics as you have the department of education.” Some difficulty was experienced in understanding why the men who devote not only money, but knowledge and devotion as well, to charitable and social work are not the heads of the different departments of the public administration.

The accurate and accessible records kept by co-operating organized charities in this country were warmly cominended, as were also the knowledge and devotion of the officers of these societies, which, although often almost without formal affiliation, nevertheless co-operate effectively through the personal agreement and understanding of their leaders.

The sums spent for outdoor relief by the public organization of charity seem very small compared with the sums distributed by German poor-boards. Private charitable organizations supplement the failing public work, and in many cases distribute large sums annually. The total expenditure for public and private charities in the United States seems insufficient, when compared with the total for Germany. But several widely varying conditions must affect this impression. The people of Germany are more accustomed to receiving help of varying kinds than are Americans, and, furthermore, the preventive measures taken by private societies in the United States and their effort to give work to all who need it (a thing more possible in America than in older countries) are leading factors which must be considered in making a comparison. The spirit of self-support is stimulated also by the work of the social settlements in America.

Dr. Münsterberg expresses himself as having formed a strong impression that the charge of utilitarianism, which is so frequently applied to American institutions, must be withheld in the field of charities and social work; indeed, that, on the other hand, we are discussing a work and a spirit of unlimited idealism." - Charities, November 12, 1904.

E. B. W.

RECENT LITERATURE

BOOKS