Endless were the variations on this theme by Socialist orators during the half century preceding World War I. But the more we examine the actual feelings of the "founders of Scientific Socialism," Marx and Engels; the more we study their concrete proposals in a lifetime of activity; the more we examine, too, the everyday voice as against the holiday voice of the leaders of the Socialist Parties; and finally, the more closely we study the real workingman as against the image of him painted in such works as the Communist Manifesto—the more this assurance of internationalism dissolves into air.

Although recurring famine has been removed from the Russian scene by the Communist masters, the Soviet leadership has been sorely tried to keep agricultural production ahead of a rapidly expanding population—an estimated increase of "more than 3,000,000 people every year." Furthermore, not long before his death Stalin noted that the dragging feet of Soviet agriculture were beginning to have an adverse effect upon the expansion of industry. Premier Khrushchev has concentrated his greatest attention upon the serious problems of agriculture. His speech delivered at Minsk January 22, 1958, proposing the removal of the M. T. S. (Machine-Tractor Stations) as the mainstay of the collective farm system is but the latest in a growing list of changes and new programs he has introduced into Soviet agriculture.

Several studies have been carried out in recent years on individual branches of the Soviet economy, and the results are illuminating. We are supplied with heretofore lacking information concerning these branches. Equally important, although the studies highlight factors internal to the industries, they cast much light on the operation of the Soviet economy in general. The present article is based on such a study of the Soviet logging industry. It is hoped that the results, presented in summary form, may provide one more means by which to evaluate the operation and general direction of the Soviet economy.

Of all the Russian political writers of the last two centuries, there is none more eloquent in his demands for justice and liberty than Aleksandr Nikolaevich Radishchev (1749-1802). Honor is due to him as the first Russian to risk his civil service career, his fortune, his family's well-being and his life itself to publish a resounding denunciation of serfdom and arbitrary government. He was the first to warn that, without timely social reforms, revolution would be inevitable and terrible; he was the first to go into exile "to blaze a trail where there was no trace," a trail "for bold men . . . for feeling hearts and for the truth . . . "

At the moment when Gomulka returned to power Poland was facing bankruptcy. The productivity of labor had fallen to its lowest point since 1918 when the country regained its independence. Its social structure was in an advanced state of disintegration as all social organizations—professional, cultural and political—taken over by the Communists and blocked as channels of public opinion were deserted by the masses. Finally the public authority and government, in all its departments and on all levels, deprived of the power of decision, lost authority, initiative and the ability to act.

The work of Le Play, Ducpétiaux and Engel on family budget studies first attracted interest in Russia in the 1890's, at a time when zemstvo statisticians had already started to make some sample household surveys. In the twenty years before the Revolution a number of extensive studies of peasant households and a handful of small studies of workers' households were made.

There were a few isolated Russian studies before this time, but the earliest and most complete studies of peasants and workers in Russia were made by Le Play himself in 1844 and 1853.

The American purchase of Alaska from Russia in 1867 is often cited today as an example of providential intervention in behalf of America's national security. Commentators shudder at the thought of Soviet air bases in what was once Russian America and praise the near miraculous foresight of Secretary of State William Seward.

Comprising as it does the only real estate transaction ever completed by Russia and America, Seward's annexation of Alaska properly holds a rather unique place in the diplomatic annals of both countries. The tendency of textbook writers to over-dramatize the role of Providence and to imply that Seward alone saw the value of Russian America is, however, both mistaken and unfortunate.

Since the Twentieth Congress of the Communist Party in Moscow, and especially in 1957, there has been growing evidence of unrest in the ranks of Soviet Armenian writers. Not to be outdone by their Russian colleagues, Armenian poets and novelists have produced a body of new work which has evoked from party whips in the Union of Armenian Soviet Writers a number of excoriating speeches and articles as revealing of ferment as similar manifestations to the north.

Within that present-day, postwar croatian literature which has been developing on native soil we can distinguish three generations of writers. Of these the two younger are so close to one another that it sometimes is difficult to say to which generation a writer belongs. Their position with respect to the last world war best indicates where to place them.

When the war began, the first generation was already mature in years and had more or less definitive artistic personalities.

There were many great actors in the Imperial Theatres of Russia but between 1874 and 1916 there was one actress whose talent shone brighter than any other. This was Maria Gavrilovna Savina who, for forty years, adorned the stage of the Alexandrinsky Theatre in St. Petersburg. After she played in Shpazhinsky's popular drama, "The Enchantress," the admiring theatre-goers gave her the name she deserved—"Enchantress of the Russian Stage."