developed receptive faculty.  The American woman, this writer states, in discovering her own individuality has not yet learnt how to manage it; it is still “largely a useless, uneasy factor, vouchsafing her very little more peace than it does those in her immediate surcharged vicinity.”  Her circumstances tend to make of her “a curious anomalous hybrid; a cross between a magnificent, rather unmannerly boy, and a spoiled, exacting demi-mondaine, who sincerely loves in this world herself alone.”  She has not yet learnt that woman’s supreme work in the world can only be attained through the voluntary acceptance of the restraints of marriage.  The same writer points out that the fault is not alone with American women, but also with American men.  Their idolatry of their women is largely responsible for that intolerance and selfishness which causes so many divorces; “American women are, as a whole, pampered and worshipped out of all reason.”  But the men, who lend themselves to this, do not feel that they can treat their wives with the same comradeship as the French treat their wives, nor seek their advice with the same reliance; the American woman is placed on an unreal pedestal.  Yet another American writer, Rafford Pyke ("Husbands and Wives,” Cosmopolitan, 1902), points out that only a small proportion of American marriages are really unhappy, these being chiefly among the more cultured classes, in which the movement of expansion in women’s interests and lives is taking place; it is more often the wife than the husband who is disappointed in marriage, and this is largely due to her inability to merge, not necessarily subordinate, her individuality in an equal union with his.  “Marriage to-day is becoming more and more dependent for its success upon the adjustment of conditions that are psychical.  Whereas in former generations it was sufficient that the union should involve physical reciprocity, in this age of ours the union must involve a psychic reciprocity as well.  And whereas, heretofore, the community of interest was attained with ease, it is now becoming far more difficult because of the tendency to discourage a woman who marries from merging her separate individuality in her husband’s.  Yet, unless she does this, how can she have a complete and perfect interest in the life together, and, for that matter, how can he have such an interest either?”

Professor Muensterberg, the distinguished psychologist, in his frank but appreciative study of American institutions, The Americans, taking a broader outlook, points out that the influence of women on morals in America has not been in every respect satisfactory, in so far as it has tended to encourage shallowness and superficiality.  “The American woman who has scarcely a shred of education,” he remarks (p. 587), “looks in vain for any subject on which she has not firm convictions already at hand....  The arrogance of this feminine lack of knowledge is the symptom