File:Review of reviews and world's work (1890) (14598236067).jpg

Identifier: reviewofreviewsw33newy (find matches)
Title: Review of reviews and world's work
Year: 1890 (1890s)
Authors:
Subjects:
Publisher: New York Review of Reviews Corp
Contributing Library: Robarts - University of Toronto
Digitizing Sponsor: University of Toronto

View Book Page: Book Viewer
About This Book: Catalog Entry
View All Images: All Images From Book
Click here to view book online to see this illustration in context in a browseable online version of this book.

Text Appearing Before Image:
acter 497 The Invasion of French Literatui-e by Women 498 The Artist Who Exalts Labor 499 Austiia, Servia, and Bulgaria 50(i» W^ith portraits and other illustraCionsvBriefer Notes on Topics in the Periodicals... 501 The New Books 507 With portraits. TERMS: $3.00 a year in advance; 25 cents a number. Foreign postage $1.00 a year additional. Subscribers may remit to usby post-ottice or express money orders, or by bank ciiecks, drafts, or registered letters. ^Money in letters is at sendersrisk. Henew as early as possible, in order to avoid a break in tlie receipt of the numbers. Bookdealers, Postmasters, andNewsdealers receive sul)scriptions. (.Subscriptions to the English Review ov Reviews, wliich is edited and published byMr. W. T. Stead in London, may be sent to this office, and orders for single copies ran also be filled, at tlie price of $2..)(>for the yearly subscription, including postage, or 25 cents for single copies.) THE REVIEW OF REVIEWS CO.,13 Aster Place, New York City.
Text Appearing After Image:
THE AMERICAN MONTHLY Review of Reviews. Vol. XXXIII. NEW YOHK, APRIL, 1906. No. 4. THE PROGRESS OF THE WORLD. The Senate Important news developments last^Knth^f mouth within and without the lialls Rate Bill. ^^ Congress tended to focus attentionmore and more on tlie fortunes of the Hepburnrailroad-rate bill in the United States Senate.The manner in which the bill was brought beforethe Senate was in itself both unusual and unex-pected. It had been well understood, as pointedout in these pages last month, that the Repub-lican majority in the Senate was divided on theprinciples of tlie measure, particularly on thequestion of the extent to which the revision ofthe rates determined by the Interstate CommerceCommission should be intrusted to the courts.It had been generally assumed, however, thatthose Senators who cojisidered the Hepburn billdefective in this particular would unite on an

Note About Images