refuses to sanction action until the successive steps to be taken have been worked out with logical accuracy, and a scientific groove, so to speak, has been hollowed out along which action can proceed.  As soon as this is accomplished, the flood of volitional impulse enters gladly into the channel prepared for it and moves on in it with irresistible force.  Bismarck represents the active side, as the eminent philosophers of the German people represent the side of logical construction.  The two sides must be taken together to understand German history and the tendencies prevailing in Germany today.

Underneath it all, of course, is German sentiment, but of this we need take no account in discussing German discipline, except in so far as love for the Fatherland enters in to sustain the patience of the people under the burden of their military establishment.

Discipline, or the subordination of the inexpert to the expert, likewise accounts for certain peculiarities of the German political parties.  Prince von Buelow mentions three examples of supremely efficient organization—­the Prussian Army, the Roman Catholic hierarchy, and the German Social Democracy.  There are some 4,200 Socialist associations, subject to the orders of forty-two district associations, these in turn being ruled by the Central Committee.  The working of the Social Democratic machine is almost flawless.  The discipline, it is said, is iron.

Again, the conception of Government in Germany, unlike that which prevails in England, France, or America, is determined by the idea of expertness.  The Government is the political expert par excellence.  Its business is to study the interests of the State as a whole.  In all matters of economic theory, of finance, of administration, of social reform, it invokes the advice of specialists.  But it is itself the supreme political specialist.  It stands high above all the political parties.  It does not depend for its existence on majorities in Parliament.  It seeks the co-operation of Parliament, but reserves to itself the right of initiative and leadership.

The object of the above remarks is to explain, not to justify, and in the face of much uninstructed criticism to point out the deep sources in the nature of the German people from which spring the influences that have molded their life.  The chief objections to their system may be summarized in the statements, that it takes too little account of the value of the inexpert; that it tends to suppress latent spontaneity; and, especially in the sphere of government, that it ascribes to the expert a knowledge of the needs of the people such as no ruling class can ever possess.  And it overlooks the highest aim of political life and activity, which is the education of the inexpert to such a point that they may become more or less expert in understanding and promoting the public weal.

FELIX ADLER.

[Illustration:  MAURICE MAETERLINCK. See Page 144]