“The book is interesting reading. A good deal of the evidence accepted by Mrs Webster is very shaky, since it consists of accounts given after the ending of the terror by men who wished to exculpate themselves at the expense of their colleagues.” B. R.
+ − Ath p943 S 26 ’19 1850w
“It overstates its case in an endeavor to emphasize the dangers and the downright wickedness of revolutions and revolutionaries. It is, perhaps, too long. Certainly it is prejudiced. But it is a good piece of work, and good reading, for all that, and any account of the French revolution must reckon with it and the material on which it is based.” W. C. Abbott
+ − Bookm 51:570 Jl ’20 1850w
“The style is fascinating, the temper sincere, and the argument (granting the hypotheses) convincing. But there are faults of method, prejudices of standpoint, and manipulations of material, which make the book not only a most biased interpretation of the French revolution but one of the most mischievous and malicious attacks on democracy that have come to our notice. The book is called ‘a study in democracy’; it is a studied insult to democracy from cover to cover.” D. S. Muzzey
− + Nation 111:300 S 11 ’20 2200w
“Allowing for Mrs Webster’s tenderness for that old régime, to which in other respects she is only just, she deserves our devout thanks for having shown that the French revolution was not at all a democratic movement. To a large circle of younger readers who are more and more getting their knowledge of historical events from text books and novels, this volume will prove a real delight.” M. F. Egan
+ − N Y Times 25:10 Je 27 ’20 2350w
“She has written an interesting and ingenious survey from her own special angle, but one can not help feeling that the angle is a somewhat narrow one.”
+ − Review 2:653 Je 23 ’20 1300w