will be made to establish one great Slav Empire. There is in reality no true Pan-Slav movement in Austria. The Northern Slavs-the Czechs, Poles and Ruthenes-are geographically widely separated from their Southern brethren-the Serbs, the Slovenes and the Croats. Differences based on historical traditions, education, and language also stand in the way of amalgamation. Moreover, up to the present time there has been no real unity of purpose even amongst the Southern Slavs. Croats and Serbs are ethnologically related to each other. They speak a common language. But, while the former are Catholics and write in Latin, the latter are Orthodox and use Cyrillic characters. There has thus, up to the present time, been much hostility between these two branches of the Slav race. A Coalition party has, however, now sprung up whose object it is to unite the most intelligent elements amongst both Serbs and Croats. Signor Gayda thinks that the Southern Slavs are gradually getting to understand each other; and Mr Seton-Watson, who enters into a full discussion of this highly important question, is of opinion that 'Croato-Serb unity must and will come.' It is greatly to be hoped that Italy will not interpose any obstacles to its accomplishment.

Amidst the numerous plans for federation and for the bestowal of local autonomy in various degrees, which have from time to time been put forward, only to be discarded by reason of the obstacles which they would have encountered in their execution, it appears that the scheme designated as Trialism is that which finds most favour at Vienna, while it also in some degree elicits the approval of the Slovenes and Croats. This plan would involve adding a third kingdom, that of Illyria, to the present Dual Monarchy. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Dalmatia, Croatia and Slavonia would be gathered together in one group and would constitute a kingdom under the sceptre of the Emperor. The proposal appears statesmanlike, but it would be presumptuous on the part of any foreigner to hazard an opinion on its feasibility. It is, however, clear that it would encounter strong opposition in Hungary, all the more so because one of the objects of the Viennese politicians in putting it forward would not improbably be that, by the creation of a new

Illyrian kingdom, some means might be found to balance the strong and at times even arrogant pressure which Magyar influence exercises on the Central Government. Moreover, it is certain that, as one of the results of the present war, the conditions under which in the future the problem will have to be solved will differ materially from those which have obtained in the past. It may well be that it is now too late to adopt the policy of Trialism with any prospect of success, and that nothing short of the creation of a wholly independent Southern Slav State will meet the requirements of the situation. The sword has been thrown into the balance, and the sword must decide. Mr Steed, who was previously inclined to take a hopeful view of the future of Austria, says, speaking in the preface to the last edition of his great work of the recent action taken against Serbia:

'I confess that, notwithstanding much experience of the foolishness and short-sighted unmorality of the AustroHungarian official world, I was not prepared for a policy so wickedly foolhardy, not to say deliberately suicidal, as that adopted by the advisers of the Hapsburg Crown in connexion with the death of the late Heir-Presumptive. . . . I did not anticipate that even "moderate foresight on the part of the Dynasty" would have been utterly lacking, nor that "the line of least resistance" to intrigue and warlike clamour would have been so readily taken. In a word, I under-estimated both the folly and the cynical weakness of the men responsible for the management of Hapsburg affairs.'

Pending the solution of this stupendous question it may be observed that the creation of a Southern Slav State would almost necessarily involve the acknowledgment of the independence of the Northern Slavs and the gravitation of the Austrian Germans towards Germany. In other words, Austria would cease to exist. The object of the present writer, however, is not so much to discuss what solutions are possible, as to perform the more humble task of directing public attention to its importance, and of indicating the very great difficulties which stand in the way of the full application of nationalist principles. It is well that the nature of those difficulties should be realised, not only by the statesmen, but also by the general public, of this country.

6

Finally, it would be both unjust and ungenerous not to recognise that the political bed of thorns on which Fate has destined that Modern Austria should lie, is not wholly of her own making. It has, in its essential features, been created by the onward march of democracy, which has given an immense impulse to the nationalist movement throughout the world. The political problems which have arisen out of that movement are of surpassing difficulty. Nor is it as yet at all clear how they can be solved. It is the irony of Fate that the various issues at stake should have acquired special prominence in a country which, as Signor Gayda truly says, has never grasped the importance of national movements and national passions,' and which, as Mr Steed puts it, has shown a perpetual inability to appreciate the force of the moral elements in a situation.' The accusation which may justly be brought against Austria is that her faulty statesmanship, far from tending towards a solution of the problems involved, has greatly enhanced their inherent difficulties. 'Mistakes committed in statesmanship," Bismarck has said, 'are not always punished at once, but they always do harm in the end. The logic of history is a more exact and a more exacting accountant than is the strictest national auditing department.' The day of retribution for Austria appears to be at hand. She has to give an account of her stewardship to the auditors, not only of her own country, but also of the civilised world in general. It can scarcely be doubted that their verdict will be unfavourable. The ultimate survival of Austria as a separate political entity is more than doubtful; but, if she is to survive at all, she will certainly have to make a radical change in the principles of government which, under priestly and military influences, have so far guided her action.

CROMER.

Art. 11.-SOME BOOKS ON THE WAR.

1. German Ambitions.

By Vigilans sed Equus.' Reprinted from the 'Spectator.' London: Smith, Elder, 1905.

2. The Anglo-German Problem. By Charles Sarolea. London: Nelson, 1912.

3. Germany and England. By J. A. Cramb. London: Murray, 1914.

4. The German Enigma. By Georges Bourdon (19..). Translated by Beatrice Marshall. London: Dent, 1914. 5. France in Danger. By Paul Vergnet (1913). Translated by Beatrice Barstow. London: Murray, 1915. 6. The Origins of the War. By J. Holland Rose. Cambridge University Press, 1914.

7. What is Wrong with Germany? By W. Harbutt Dawson. London: Longmans, 1915.

8. The World in the Crucible. By Sir Gilbert Parker. London: Murray, 1915.

9. Ordeal by Battle. By F. S. Oliver. London: Macmillan, 1915.

10. The History of Twelve Days (July 24-Aug. 4, 1914). By J. W. Headlam. London: Unwin, 1915.

11. The Evidence in the Case. By James M. Beck. New York Putnam, 1915.

12. A Text-Book of the War for Americans. By J. William White. Philadelphia: Winston, 1915.

And other works.

THE present war is on a scale many times vaster than any previously known in the history of the world. The great increase of population, the far greater increase of wealth, the prodigious development of the machinery of war by land, by sea and by air, all unite to make the catastrophe which we are witnessing one without parallel or measure. And there is another, less terrible and fatal way in which it has utterly exceeded all its predecessors. It is waged by nearly all Europe; and the European races, both in their original homes and in the new worlds which they have conquered, have in the last hundred years taken to thinking, talking, and writing about public affairs to an extent quite unknown, except on the small stage of Athens, throughout their previous

history. The result is that this war has been discussed more thoroughly than any other war ever was. It provoked a considerable literature, that of warning or anticipation, long before it broke out. And since it began not only newspapers and magazines but books dealing with it have appeared incessantly in all countries especially, perhaps, in England and America, always peculiarly given to the habit of discussing public questions, and both of them, even England, freer to indulge it at this moment than the only other country which has the habit to at all the same extent.

The discussion has been from every possible point of view. In Germany for years before war broke out some seven hundred books dealing with the science of war appeared annually. Many of these dealt with forecasts of some such colossal struggle as we are witnessing and the way it would be worked out. Others, like the well-known work of Bernhardi, dealt with it rather from the semi-political and moral, or rather immoral, point of view. Others approached it from the side of history, finance, international law, diplomacy, or ethics. The possible points of view are, in fact, very numerous; and the books themselves, especially those written since war broke out, are past counting. It is clear that in the limited space of an article in the Quarterly Review' only a very few can be dealt with. I propose, therefore, to confine myself here almost exclusively to English and American books, and, among these, to leave aside altogether those which are concerned primarily with military or financial questions; and merely to touch on a few of those which discuss such problems as the European or Anglo-German situation which is supposed to have rendered the war inevitable, the events of July 1914, the responsibility for the actual outbreak of war, or the political and moral issues involved.

It is obvious that very little, if any, of this enormous bulk of writing can be of any permanent importance. It is just journalism, good or bad as the case may be, whether it appears in the form of a book or in the columns of a newspaper. But the essence of journalism is to give the facts and opinions of the day, and for the day they have not only their interest but their