صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

in instructive reference to the more noted men and events of that stirring time. Upon the work of such a man it is difficult to place a proper estimate. The biographer thus sums up his labors :

“In his unparalleled itinerant career, he preached about sixteen thousand five hundred sermons, and travelled about two hundred and seventy thousand miles, presiding in no less than two hundred and twenty-four annual conferences, and ordaining more than four thousand preachers.”

The School and the Army in Germany and France; with a Diary of

Siege Life at Versailles. By Brevet Maj. Gen. W. B. HAZEN,
U.S.A., Colonel Sixth Infantry. 12mo, pp. 400. New York:
Harper & Brothers.

1872. ANYTHING relating to the Franco-Prussian war, especially whatever tends to elucidate the cause of its startling termination, will be favorably received at the present time, while its memory is fresh in the minds of all. Although it was well known that the ancient animosity between the two nations was liable to break forth in war at any time, and that since the triumphal entry of Napoleon I. into Berlin Prussia had been awaiting the opportunity to avenge her injuries, yet the world in general was not prepared for the complete triumph and corresponding disaster which followed.

In the volume before us we have the causes of that result made known as they appeared to a man of military education and experience, with observations on the field of strife, both before and during the war. The author says, in his introduction, that after a visit to the French camp at Chalons in 1867, what he then saw of the tone and character of the French army and people made the events which followed three years later a foregone conclusion. It is evident, however, at the

, first glance, that Gen. Hazen is strongly biased in favor of the Germans. This he acknowledges in the opening chapter, and again at the close of the rolume, where he says he has found so much to admire in the simple, earnest life of the German people, and has endeavored to be just in his criticisms upon French characters and methods. He has generally succeeded in his treatment of the military systems of the two countries, and of the schools upon which they are respectively based. But in speaking of the two peoples we find only praise of the Germans, and that in unqualified terms of admiration, while of the French, especially of the lower classes, he speaks in terms of severe criticism. From his pages one might infer that Bismarck was the most unambitious of

as the

statesmen, William the most liberal of sovereigns, and the Ger. mans the only noble type of mankind, whereas the French are selfish, unenlightened, haughty, and vindictive! None thin k more highly of the Germans than we do ourselves.

Their in tegrity, industry, and bravery need no vindication ; but as regards Fra nce our autbor's assumption is as unjust as it is illogical. France, although defeated, is and ever will be great. Even since the war she has given to the world unmistakable evidence of her inherent strength in the patient and patriotic manner in which her people, unheed- . ing the reproach which has been cast upon them, have gone to work to repair the losses of the war, and pay the debt which an uprelenting foe had imposed upon them. Never was that wonderful recuperative power, which she has shown in so many reverses, more strikingly illustrated. The world cannot, and will not forget the debt it owes to France, upon whose fields were wrought out many of the grandest problems of modern civilization, while Germariy, greatest of her own thinkers tells us, was yet but a wilderness, sending her fierce hordes to ravage the fertile plains of Normandy. Neither is lost to the world the example of steady, unflinchin g devotion to principle, which the Germanic people have ever evinced. The efforts of the real friends of German unity and liberty have the good will of all mankind; but it cannot be denied that those now in control of German affairs desire no unity but what centres in the Emperor, and no liberty not subordinate to his will. Fra nce has gained more liberty and made more republican progress as the result of the war than Germany, Prussia, at best, has only gained for the cause of German unity what her previous self aggrandizing course had lost.

We make these remarks that we may not appear to have unjustly criticised our author's partiality. Nor would we be understood as saying that this partiality, though it may at times betray him into too general commendations, is so excessive as to neutralize the interest of the varrative portion of the work, or the value of the remaining portion upon the army and school.

As we have indicated, the first part is a narrative of the author's experience upon the field of conflict, and his observations upon military operations, and the armies and leaders engaged in them. This comparison of the two armies, which is evidently just, shows that the German army was vastly superior to the French in organization, unity, leadership, and the morale of the troops. Napoleon was undoubtedly

He says:

right in attributing the cause of his defeat to the fact that the Ger. mans were ready too soon for him. They had been perfecting for many years that military systeni which now stands among the best in the world. This part of the work is enlivened by descriptions of persons and places, anecdotes, and illustrations taken from the author's own experience in the late war. But from his description of the German troops who were quartered upon the inhabitants, we might infer that they were little less than angels in disguise whom the obstinate French had not the discernment to appreciate.

“The kindest relations seem to exist between host and guest, all over the city, as soon they understand each other. The soldiers are everywhere favorites when they become domesticated, doing all manner of littleaffairs for the family, and going errands, caring for the children, and helping about the house ” (p. 64).

If cruel Mars must still go forth, it is to be hoped that he will al. ways thus soften his stern features! Of the Crown Prince, also, he says: “His face expresses so much that is good as to preclude the fear that he will ever be unjust” (!) (p. 76). Our author evidently, has great faith in bumanity, especially humanity of the Hohenzollern type.

The second portion of the work is devoted to the history, organization, and condition of the army and school in the two countries. Here, as we have seen, the advantage is decidedly with Germany. Ourauthor's comparative observations upon our own army are very interesting and instructive, if not very encouraging or flattering to our national pride. Some of the faults he notes in our army are the enlistment of men for their physical qualifications alone, without reference to moral character, by which thieves and cut-throats are enlisted who, as might be ex. pected, soon become deserters and “bounty jumpers.” He also condemns the undue number and influence of staff officers, the appointment and promotion of officers by faver and political influence, and the extravagance in all departments. Upon this point he makes some valuable suggestions, and asks some pertinent questions, which men are beginning to ask in relation to other departments of our government, and which statesmen may well ponder. We quote the paragraph entire :

“It was common to hear that the State received no more than half the service it paid for, and it appears to be a settled sentiment that the State cannot be served with the economy one finds in private affairs. This is an unfortunate misapprehension, but one that cannot be corrected till we employ systems in which educated reason, and not political expediency and personal favor, shall govern. If our system required a million men on the rolls of the army, under the pay of the nation which was losing their industries, to get two hundred and fifty thousand men in the front line with muskets in their hands, when we might have had the same number of muskets there with but half a million on its rolls, then our system was not the best. If we had seventy-five thousand officers under commission and pay, when we only required fifteen thousand, then our system was not the best. If we paid for the best quality of clothing, blankets, hats, stationery, and a long list of necessary articles, and received only shoddy and shams, then our system was not the best. If we lost half a million of lives, when by some other course we could have conducted the war as effectively, and lost but a hundred thousand, then our system was not the best. If our war cost six hundred millions of dollars, when it need not have cost more than two hundred millions, then our system was not the best” (f. 246).

The observations upon the school systems of the two countries are, as the author states, principally compilations, but in most cases made with care and judgment. The connection between the school and the ariny is so intimate that he gives them together as the cause of which the result of the war is the effect. The universities of both countries are too well known to require comment. The history of popular education in France is one of repeated attempts and failures to supply the masses with mental aliment. Gen. Hazen pays a just tribute to the self-sacrificing and noble work of the order of the Christian Brothers in teaching the poor. It was, he testifies, purely a labor of love, and their success was commensurate with their devotion (p. 347). In the better education of the masses, we find the ground of that high morale which, combined with their superior military system, gave the Prussians their easy victory. The author has so arranged and presented the facts as to lead logically to this conclusion. They are generally stated in a candid manner, and illustrated so as to render the whole very readable. An appendix is added giving the organization and equipment of the German army, which we also commend to the perusal of those interested in such matters.

SCIENCE AND JOURNALISM.

Primeval Man. An Examination of some Recent Speculations. 12mo.

pp. 200. By the DUKE OF ARGYLL. New York: De Witt C. Lent & Co. 1872.

All questions relating to the origin, antiquity, and primitive condition of our race, are of deep interest to the majority of readers as well as to the scientist. These are briefly discussed in the neat little volume before us, which, although it is stated to be merely "an examination of some recent speculations,” treats of many of the grandest and deepest problems affecting humanity, each of which is

sufficiently suggestive and comprehensive to fill volumes. In discussing these questions, the author evinces, as in his former publications, a thorough acquaintance with the latest developments of science, and a candid and intrepid manner of dealing with the conclusions of the most noted scientists, such as Darwin, Huxley and Sir J. Lubbock.

The argument is mainly a reply to that of Sir J. Lubbock, who claims that the primitive condition of man was one of “utter barbarism.” · This, in its turn, is a reply to the argument of Archbishop Whateley, that nowhere could man, by his own unaided powers, have risen from a condition of complete helplessness and ignorance.

Both of these positions the author shows to be untenable, or, at least, very difficult to maintain. The main argument against the "savage theory,” is the fact of the tendency to degradation observed in man everywhere, and that all savages are found at the extremities of the earth,' where they have been pushed from the centres of population by the multiplication of the species. Against Archbishop Whateley's argument the Duke advances the fact, that many of man's first acts, such as throwing a stone or wielding a stick, are as purely instinctive as a brute's use of its own organs of defence, and here his reasoning faculties stepping in, he begins the conquest of intellect over force. He deals the development theory of man's origin a heavy blow, in showing the co-relation of man's anatomical structure to his mental facúlties, and in the fact that in proportion as man's reasoning faculties were developed his physical frame became weaker. Hence, unless his intellect was considerably developed first, on the principle of the survival of the fittest” he would have perished altogether.

In regard to the antiquity of man, the Duke of Argyll comes to the conclusion pursued on several lines of scientific inquiry, that it is very great; and this he regards as going far to show the unity of the race. We have merely glanced at the arguments pursued and the questions discussed, but commend the perusal of this little volume to all who like an agreeable and instructive companion.

Brittan's Journal. Spiritual Science, Literature, Art, and Inspiration.

Quarterly. S. B. BRITTAN, M. D., Editor. Vol. 1, No. 1, 8vo, pp. 144. New York, 1872.

It iş but rarely that we can spare the least time from our own journal to devote attention to any other. When we do so, however, it is never to depreciate the efforts of our contemporaries. Far from VOL. XXVI. - NO. LI.

13

« السابقةمتابعة »