d about the time (1772), of his lordship's birth."
There is a tradition in Boston that "caucus" was a common word here
before the Revolutionary war broke out, and that it originated in a feud
between the British troops on the one side and the rope-walkers and
calkers on the other. Bloody collisions, it is said, occurred between
them. The latter held meetings in the _calkers' hall_ in the lower
part of the city, at which resolutions were adopted and speeches made
denouncing the soldiers, who, on their part deriding the wordy war
offered, sneeringly snubbed their opponents "The Calkers," which by an
easy corruption became "the caucus," and finally a term to denote the
meetings.

Whether this be the origin or not of the word, one thing is certain--Mr.
George W. LAWTON has done a most commendable thing in the
publication of his little book on _The American Caucus System_.[9]
It is exceedingly useful, and the wonder is for us why some such work
has not earlier issued from the press, for it meets the requirements of
the multitudinous politicians and others who are never absent on "caucus
nights." The author begins at the beginning of his theme, and shows how
easily men, that is, mankind in general, choose to be controlled by
political power, and to bear its burdens; he then establishes the axiom
that the direction of political power is with the caucus, and goes on
still further to explain what gives the caucus its authority, to compare
caucus nominations with self-nominations, and then historically to trace
the growth of the caucus, and, lastly, to describe the proceedings of,
and how to conduct, a caucus meeting. From first to last, these pages
are suggestive, timely, and embody a great deal of good sound sense.

* * * * *

The late Mr. Walter Bagehot left behind him some materials for a book
which promised to make a landmark in the history of economics, by
separating the use of the older, or Ricardian, economic reasonings from
their abuse, and freeing them from the discredit into which they had
fallen through being often misapplied. Unfortunately he did not complete
more than the examination of two of their postulates, namely, the
transferability of capital and labor. These were originally published in
the _Fortnightly Review_, in 1876, and are now republished, with
some other materials for the author's proposed work, under the title of
_The Postulates of English Political Economy_.[10] Thes