REVIEWS 177 



the miscellaneous races of which the United States makes its citizens. His 

 Librarian is no mere storekeeper of books, but a man of talent and education who 

 will assist readers and be an inspiration and a help to them 



Although libraries have long been considered of first importance in the 

 University system of education, their use in schools has been largely neglected. 

 In an essay entitled " Library work with Children," the author discusses how this 

 may best be rectified. To what extent these library ideals have already been 

 attained in the United States may be gathered from various statements by the 

 author. It is plain that the citizens of the United States are far better provided 

 with library facilities than we are in this country, especially in the smaller towns 

 and country districts, the latter being supplied by travelling libraries. As an 

 example of this development of Free Libraries in a country district, it is stated that 

 during the year 1907 in the state of Wisconsin 122,093 books were circulated to the 

 rural population by these travelling libraries. 



The book is delightfully written, and we recommend it to those interested in 

 books and in education. We wish that it might be read by our local legislators 

 who are responsible for the application of the Free Libraries Act. 



R. E. S. 



Joseph Priestley. (Pioneers of Progress :- Men of Science.) By D. H. Peacock. 

 [Pp. 63.] (London : Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge ; New 

 York: The Macmillan Company, 1919. Price 2s. net.) 



An excellent sketch of the life and activities of this eminent philosopher is given 

 in the five short chapters which constitute this little book. Theologian, educa- 

 tionist, historian, chemist, and companion to a nobleman — all these aspects of 

 Priestley are properly dealt with by the author. The wretched business of the 

 Birmingham riots which forced Priestley to leave that town and ultimately his 

 country, practically mark the end of his scientific discoveries, and his subsequent 

 life in America is treated in consequence with great brevity. 



Priestley gives us the impression to-day of a dilettante rather than a serious 

 student of science. " Chemistry," says our author, " was little more than a hobby 

 to him ; theology was his life-work." His failure to do more than he did in 

 advancing scientific knowledge was due, in most part, to two things — to his almost 

 fanatical adherence to the Phlogiston Theory, and to his failure in the matter of 

 quantitative measurement. " Priestley was not only an experimental but also a 

 speculative philosopher and a theologian. His studies in other directions than 

 experimental science would not be such as to lead him to attach weight to quanti- 

 tative data." " He was at times surprisingly inaccurate in measurement." He 

 had, on the other hand, a contempt for theories and hypotheses, and his view that 

 " if a former theory will sufficiently account for all the facts, there is no occasion 

 to have recourse to a new one, attended with no particular advantage," might be 

 taken to heart a little more in our own time. 



The author gives an adequate account of Priestley's chemical work on gases. 

 Perhaps a little more might have been made of Priestley's experiments on plants, 

 several of which revealed fundamental facts of plant physiology. Apart from this 

 the only criticism this writer has" to make is in regard to the statement that "the 

 Priestleys were a sturdy, long-lived stock, with the evenness of temperament that 

 comes from generations of healthy ancestors." It would be interesting to know 

 what evidence forms the basis for the view that evenness of temperament is a result 

 of " generations of healthy ancestors." 



W. S. 

 12 



