[Illustration:  JAMES BRYCE]

The most striking characteristic of the man is his versatility; a quality which in his case has not been accompanied by its usual defects, for his achievements in one field seem to have made him no less conscientious in others, while they have given him that breadth of view which is more essential than any special training to the critic of men and affairs.  For the ten years that followed his Oxford appointment he contributed frequently to the magazines on geographical, social, and political topics.  His vacations he spent in travel and in mountain climbing, of which he gave an interesting narrative in ’Transcaucasia and Ararat’ (1877).  In 1880 he entered active politics, and was elected to Parliament in the Liberal interest.  He has continued steadfast in his support of the Liberal party and of Mr. Gladstone, whose Home Rule policy he has heartily seconded.  In 1886 he became Gladstone’s Under-Secretary of Foreign Affairs, and in 1894 was appointed President of the Board of Trade.

The work by which he is best known in this country, the ’American Commonwealth’ (1888), is the fruit of his observations during three visits to the United States, and of many years of study.  It is generally conceded to be the best critical analysis of American institutions ever made by a foreign author.  Inferior in point of style to De Tocqueville’s ‘Democracy in America,’ it far surpasses that book in amplitude, breadth of view, acuteness of observation, and minuteness of information; besides being half a century later in date, and therefore able to set down accomplished facts where the earlier observer could only make forecasts.  His extensive knowledge of foreign countries, by divesting him of insular prejudice, fitted him to handle his theme with impartiality, and his experience in the practical workings of British institutions gave him an insight into the practical defects and benefits of ours.  That he has a keen eye for defects is obvious, but his tone is invariably sympathetic; so much so, in fact, that Goldwin Smith has accused him of being somewhat “hard on England” in some of his comparisons.  The faults of the book pertain rather to the manner than to the matter.  He does not mislead, but sometimes wearies, and in some portions of the work the frequent repetitions, the massing of details, and the absence of compact statement tend to obscure the general drift of his argument and to add unduly to the bulkiness of his volumes.

* * * * *

THE POSITION OF WOMEN IN THE UNITED STATES

From ‘The American Commonwealth’