The book is worth the money, there is such a lot of it, but the editing is defective, the misprints are the work of the devil, because they alter or obscure the sense, and the index is almost a joke. The second edition of this book, if done with better cunning, should be more valuable than the first, seeing that there are omissions to be made good and better proofreading to be expected. On p. 10, 1. 5, ‘the news dragons’ is not a shy at Northbrook or Beavermere, but a misprint for new dragons. On p. 21 ‘Great Dostoievsky’s dance’ should be ‘Dostoiesky dance,’ dance being a verb in the subjunctive, a mood abhorred of casual or half-educated persons in every land. And on p. 115 no hand hath ere let fall ‘is obviously the error of an amanuensis which ought to have been put right in printing. Mr. Chesterton cannot be expected to correct his own proofs, they are so many, but someone is expected to be careful for him.

We miss a ballade or two, such as the threnody for Queen Anne, and that one beginning

A poem on the Christian Social Union meeting at Nottingham would have been worth including forasmuch as it adds to the gaiety of this nation. However, it requires a note by the author, since in this case he does not write in his own name nor in any known onomastic, but solely as an impartial, too impartial, onlooker. We do not deny that a complete