THE GIFT OF 
 
 9,njcSjUifciflX ^...■ia.......^a-knA* 
 
 ..I\-^6%\^.S 2^..1o<|..>.l. 
 
 6561 
 
Cornell University Library 
 BR139.L43 H52 
 Henry. Charles, LM I 
 
 Overs 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029242991 
 
m. '■■■ V. ' ^■'■'^\, 
 
 ^m. ■ 
 
 
 
 B _^i^B 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 9 
 
 1 « ''^^■SI^^Hr^ ^ 
 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 B *^ *' V^ .aifc^_ .at^g JB. 
 
 ..^J^^^lgl 
 
 * 
 
 ^^M 
 
 B 
 
 
 ^^ M^^^^^^^^^^r^ 
 
 i 
 
 rJJI 
 
 B 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 ^1 
 
 1 ^ f ■ ";- 
 
 • -* 
 
 I 
 
 
 ^M 
 
 1 •' / 
 
 ^ M 
 
 1 
 
 
 B 
 
 ^^^^^^^^Hb '' 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA 
 
PROCEEDINGS OP THE JOINT MEETING 
 
 OF THE 
 
 AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY 
 
 HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF PENNSYLVANIA 
 
 LIBRARY COMPANY OF PHILADELPHIA 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA 
 
 ACADEMY OF NATURAL SCIENCES OF 
 
 PHILADELPHIA 
 
 HELD JANUARY 20, igii 
 
 PRESENTATION OF PORTRAITS 
 
 OF 
 
 HENRY CHARLES LEA 
 
 AND 
 
 ISAAC LEA 
 
 ABSTRACT OF THE MEETING 
 
 OF THE 
 
 HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF PENNSYLVANIA 
 
 HELD MARCH 13, 191 1 
 
 PRESENTATION OF PORTRAIT 
 
 OF 
 
 HENRY CHARLES LEA 
 
A.zc«i%«r 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA. 
 
 (Read January 20, 191 1.) 
 
 INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. 
 
 By WILLIAM W. KEEN, M.D., LL.D., 
 President of the American Philosophical Society. 
 
 Members of the American Philosophical Society, Members and 
 Representatives of the Library Company of Philadelphia, of the Uni- 
 versity of Pennsylvania, of the Academy of Natural Sciences, and of 
 the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Ladies and Gentlemen : — 
 
 In the days of Julius Caesar and during the wars which followed 
 his assassination, " Triumvirate " was a word very familiar to 
 Roman citizens. But whether applied to the first or the second 
 triumvirate it had a sinister meaning. Our own city, however, for 
 many years has had an illustrious triumvirate of men who have been 
 eminent in literature, science and civic life, Horace Howard Furness, 
 S. Weir Mitchell and Henry Charles Lea. No other American city 
 could boast three names comparable to these. 
 
 When one of these three, and such a man as Henry Charles Lea 
 has passed away, it is fitting that his associates and the community 
 at large should halt for an hour in our busy life and pay a tribute 
 to his character and achievements. 
 
 The American Philosophical Society, of which he was an honored 
 member, therefore suggested to the four other public institutions 
 named with which Mr. Lea was associated by membership, and 
 which had benefited by his active interest and generous support, 
 that a joint meeting in memory of Mr. Lea should be held. The 
 idea was most cordially received and a speaker representing each of 
 these societies will share in the proceedings of the evening. 
 
 In addition to these distinguished local representatives, His 
 Excellency, the Right Hon. James Bryce, the British Ambassador, 
 has come from Washington especially to do honor to the memory 
 of his fellow historian and friend. 
 
iv • OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS DECEASED. 
 
 Through the generosity of Mr. Lea's family, two portraits, one 
 of Mr. Henry C. 'Lea, and the other of his father, Mr. Isaac Lea, 
 will be presented to the American Philosophical Society. 
 
 As an illustration of the thoroughness with which Mr. Lea pre- 
 pared for his work, I may cite the following little incident : 
 
 While spending the winter of 1907-8 in Rome I saw in an anti- 
 quarian bookstore a catalogue of books on Witchcraft, a subject in 
 which I knew Mr. Lea was deeply interested and of which, though 
 he was then eighty-three years old, he contemplated writing a full 
 account. I sent the catalogue to him— a list of seventy or eighty 
 titles — some of them very rare, and offered to aid him in secuning 
 any which he might wish to purchase. In reply I received a letter 
 of thanks, but he declined my proffered assistance for the very 
 good reason that he " already had all of them in his library." 
 
 I have now the pleasure of introducing Edward P. Cheyney, 
 Professor of European history in the University of Pennsylvania, 
 and a co-worker with Mr. Lea, who will read a memoir on the Life 
 and Works of Mr. Lea. 
 
ON THE LIFE AND WORKS OF HENRY CHARLES LEA. 
 By EDWARD POTTS CHEYNEY. 
 
 It has been so short a time since Mr. Lea was moving among us — 
 to. so many of those who are here he is still almost a living pres- 
 ence — that it is well-nigh impossible to view his long life and to esti- 
 mate his great work as a thing detached from us, completed, a. part of 
 the past. Especially may one who through his whole mature life has 
 looked upon Mr. Lea with admiration as a scholar, with gratitude as 
 a kindly adviser, critic and friend, and with constantly increasing 
 appreciation as one of the world's great men, acknowledge the 
 inadequacy of this sketch of his life and list of his achievehients. 
 Indeed in this city, in which Mr. Lea's whole life was passed, and in 
 this company to whom his personality and much of his work were 
 famihar, I shall frequently rather be bringing his career to remem- 
 brance than giving information concerning it. 
 
 Henry Charles Lea was born in Eighth Street above Spruce, 
 Philadelphia, in the year 1825. His boyhood has left a few sugges- 
 tive reminiscences. He remembered learning the letters of the Greek 
 alphabet as a child of six at the bedside of a mother well-educated 
 and strong in mind, however frail in body — the daughter of Mathew 
 Carey, the sister of Henry C. Carey. The intellectual atmosphere 
 into which he was born and in which he grew up is indicated also 
 by the studies in natural history of his father, Isaac Lea, and by his 
 own training under a private tutor. From this tutor, whose name 
 was Eugenius Nulty, a scholar of an old and rigorous type, and a 
 man of much individuality and force, he received an unusually thor- 
 ough and effective drill in the ancient languages and other funda- 
 mentals. A short stay in 1832 at a school in Paris, where he was 
 the only boy not a native of France, probably had something to do 
 with his easy use of French, both as a spoken and a written language, 
 during his later life. He remembered the French boys bringing to 
 school bullets found in the streets after the Parisian rising that led 
 
vi OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS DECEASED. 
 
 to the dethronement of Charles X. It was a long memory that 
 covered the history of France from the Bourbons to the thirty- 
 eighth anniversary of the Third Republic. 
 
 A more characteristic reminiscence was that of his desire, as a 
 boy of twelve or fourteen, for a copy of Anacreon in the Greek, 
 which was unobtainable because of the necessity, in the shadow of 
 the crisis of 1837, of so rigid an economy as to forbid the expendi- 
 ture of fifteen cents for the cheapest copy procurable. In a series of 
 visits to the Philadelphia Library he copied the whole of Anacreon, 
 and thus possessed himself of the first of his collection of manu- 
 scripts-^none the less accurate probably because it was made in the 
 nineteenth and not in the ninth century. The publication in Silli- 
 man's Journal when he was a boy of thirteen of a paper on 
 " Manganese and its Salts," the result of a period of study in a 
 chemical laboratory, may serve as a reminder that his earliest training 
 was as much in scientific as in classical lines ; and also that his mind 
 was of that type that must produce as well as acquire. 
 
 By 1843 boyhood was over. At the age of eighteen, a new period 
 opened with his entrance into his father's publishing house, and thus 
 commenced a business career which was to last for thirty-seven 
 years, till his retirement in 1880. As a youth, during the next four 
 years, he worked hard at business in the daytime and equally hard 
 at his studies late at night and early in the morning. Few persons, 
 I think, can look over the files of the magazines of the years from 
 1843 to 1846 and realize without astonishment that the sixteen or 
 more long articles signed by Henry C. Lea were the work of a young 
 business man of eighteen to twenty-one, regularly occupied during 
 the long working hours of that period. He was fulfilling two 
 apprenticeships at the same time, one to the publishing business, the 
 other to literature. 
 
 It is curious to see the conflict of interests in the latter of these 
 fields between science and the humanities. In May, 1843, he 
 published in the Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 
 a paper on " Some New Shells from Petersburg, Va.," and in August 
 of the same year in The Knickerbocker of New York an article on 
 " Greek Epitaphs and Inscriptions." In September, 1844, in a 
 southern journal is to be found a critical article by him on Leigh 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA. vii 
 
 Hunt; two months later in a journal of natural history, a description 
 of " Certain New Species of Marine Shells." But the literary 
 gradually predominated over the scientific. In the Southern Literary 
 Messenger of Richmond, Va., in the year 1845 and early in 1846, he 
 published a series of six articles under the general heading " Remarks 
 on Various Late Poets." These are critical studies and appreciations 
 of Miss Barrett, long before she became Mrs. Browning; of Miss 
 Landon, while she was still disguised under the initials L. E. L. ; 
 of Tennyson, then publishing his earlier poems; of Eliza Cook, 
 and several others. Interspersed with these in the same and other 
 journals, are reviews and articles with many quotations and transla- 
 tions on " The Greek Symposium and its Materials," " Anacreon," 
 " The Imagination and Fancy of Leigh Hunt," the Latin poet 
 " Festus," and " Menage," the poet of the French renaissance. 
 
 To such activity there is usually but one end, and to Mr. Lea it 
 came in the year 1847, when a very serious breakdown in his health 
 put an end for a while to all efforts except those for its restoration. 
 Recuperation, travel, marriage, hard and well-remunerated mercan- 
 tile work, rather than study and writing, filled in the remaining 
 years of early manhood. 
 
 With improving health and increasing strength began what may 
 be considered a third period, marked by many activities, including 
 a resumption of written work, which had now been laid aside for 
 more than ten years. In the North American Review of January, 
 1859, appeared what was ostensibly a review by Mr. Lea of a 
 volume published by a German historian some years before. But 
 the article was really not so much a review as a scholarly study 
 of two forms of mediaeval trial, compurgation and the wager of 
 battle. An article on judicial ordeals appeared six months later, 
 also in the form of a book review. These studies, revised and 
 enlarged and with an additional chapter on torture as a form of 
 trial, were gathered into a volume and issued in 1866 under the title 
 " Superstition and Force." This was Mr. Lea's first book. Others 
 followed on similar subjects. In 1867 appeared "The History of 
 Sacerdotal Celibacy," and in 1869 " Studies in Church History." 
 These works it will be observed are in a totally different field from 
 that of his early literary and scientific writing. His entrance upon it 
 
viii OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS DECEASED. 
 
 seems to have been by the following route. In the desultory reading 
 of his long period of ill health, he had taken up the French memoir 
 writers and chroniclers. Following the bent. of a naturally logical 
 mind he had traced these writers backward in time from Commines 
 to Monstrelet, from Froissart to the Qironiques de St. Denis and 
 Villehardouin, till, in the Middle Ages, he had found himself in a 
 new world, faced and surrounded by the conceptions of mediaeval 
 law and the mediaeval church. Once having become interested in 
 this body of institutions he was more and more impressed with its 
 significance; he perceived the influence of mediaeval jurisprudence 
 and the mediaeval church on modem times; and to this phase of 
 the history of civilization he devoted the studies of the remainder 
 of his life. 
 
 But Mr. Lea's studies were still only one of his interests. He 
 was deeply moved by the questions raised by the Civil War and took 
 an active part in the work of their solution. His labors in the 
 national cause as well as those in the cause of municipal and civil 
 service reform I must leave to more competent hands for descrip- 
 tion. , I may, however, refer to his characteristic recourse to his pen 
 to, reach his objects. During the height of the dispute concerning 
 slavery, when Bishop Hopkins's pamphlet, the " Bible View of 
 Slavery," was issued and widely circulated as a defence of that insti- 
 tution on Biblical grounds, Mr. Lea wrote a parody, the " Bible View 
 of Polygamy," showing that just as good a case might be made out 
 from the Bible for the one institution as the other. Later, as a 
 warning in our treatment of the American Indians, he wrote an 
 article on the " Indian Policy of Spain," and on the outbreak of the 
 Spanish war he published an article in thS Atlantic Monthly ^oi July, 
 1908, suggesting the deep-lying causes of the decadence of Spain. 
 When we took up new responsibilities in the Philippines, he pub- 
 lished a pamphlet called " The Dead Hand," utilizing the experience 
 of Catholic governments to show the evils of the possession of land 
 by ecclesiastical bodies. These are only a few examples of much 
 more than a score of pamphlets, articles and open letters called forth 
 by public crises in which Mr. Lea took a keen, interest and to the 
 solution of which he always felt that history had something to 
 contribute. 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA. ix 
 
 His services in connection with the adoption of the first Inter- 
 national Copyright Act had the special value that he was both an 
 author and a publisher, and could look on the subject from two 
 points of view. The first of his two long perfods of service on the 
 Board of Directors of the Philadelphia Library began early in this 
 period, closing in 1879. 
 
 Before passing on to the characteristics of a later period it must 
 be noted that it was during this part of his fife that Mr. Lea laid the 
 foundation of his library. So far as I am aware Mr. Lea stands 
 alone among historical scholars in having done his work entirely in 
 his own library, without recourse to any university or public collec- 
 tion; and this library was entirely his own creation. He had no 
 nucleus for it, no aid in constructing it. No one who has ever 
 entered upon the serious study of a new field will fail to estimate 
 at something like its true value the difficulty of finding what 
 materials for its study exist,, and of obtaining access to them. 
 In Mr. Lea's subject these difficulties existed in the highest de- 
 gree. Few bibliographical guides then existed, no older or even 
 contemporary scholar was at hand to give advice; his ideals of 
 thoroughness were so uncompromising, and his desire for knowl- 
 edge of the actualities of the past was so keen, that the merely 
 obvious sources of information were quite inadequate to his desires. 
 Much that he did was' pioneer work, in which equipment must be 
 constantly adjusted to newly discovered needs. Fortunately he had 
 means which enabled him to purchase books freely wherever they 
 might be found, and when the materials needed proved to exist only 
 in a manuscript form, to have special copies, of those made for his 
 use. But the purchase, price bears no very close relation to the value 
 of a library collected with care, insight, discrimination, years of labor 
 and watchfulness, and above all a constant realization of its character 
 as an instrument adapted to a certain specific end. I may perhaps 
 be pardoned if I say that Mr. Lea's bequest of his library to the 
 University of Pennsylvania instead of either burying it in a great 
 public collection, or allowing it to remain a purely private possession, 
 or scattering it to the four winds, seems to me to place in additional 
 clearness his conception of it as a working collection for purposes of 
 
X OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS DECEASED. 
 
 research, to serve others in the future for the use to which he him- 
 self put it. 
 
 In 1865 Mr. Lea anticipated withdrawing from active business 
 hfe, but the sudden death of his partner seemed to necessitate his 
 remaining in control, and he continued a publisher for fifteen years 
 more, until 1880, when he retired. This change was coincident 
 with or shortly followed by a second breakdown, which made him 
 almost an invahd for four years from 1880 to 1884. During this 
 time his restlessly active mind could not refrain entirely from pro- 
 duction, and he returned, for the moment at least, to the more purely 
 literary interests of his earlier life. He had always been fond of 
 making translations from various languages into English, and in his 
 historical as well as his literary articles he had frequently given 
 reproductions of old poems. He had also written verse from time to 
 time, and occasionally exchanged such productions with at least one 
 other well-known business man in Philadelphia. The war especially 
 had led him to write several poems. Some forty of these, mostly 
 translations from French, German, Italian, Spanish, Latin and 
 Greek, he gathered together and published privately in 1882 under 
 the title " Translations and other Rhymes." Whether from Mr. 
 Lea's temperament, mood or physical condition, these poems look 
 rather to the darker sides of life, its experiences and mysteries ; as 
 in his own verses closing 
 
 The riddle who can read? 
 
 Who guess the reason why? 
 We know but this indeed, 
 
 We are born, we grieve, we die. 
 
 With Mr. Lea's return to his usual health in 1884 began a long 
 period, twenty-five years, of vigorous, laborious and yet serene life ; 
 old age it could hardly be called, although it carried him from his 
 sixtieth year through his eighty-fourth. The many-sided interests 
 of this period of life and activity, I can scarcely do more than name. 
 A large fortune, watched over assiduously, and with very definite 
 theories as to its investment and use; scarcely less well-marked 
 abstention from certain forms of investment; an unwillingness to 
 serve on responsible boards without performing the labor required 
 by responsibility; discriminating and carefully considered philan- 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA. xi 
 
 thropic and charitable gifts — such were some of his most material 
 interests. He gave quietly, and only after the object had fully com- 
 mended itself to him. Such giving can hardly be described in detail 
 and must be left in the main to the privacy of purely personal life. 
 A few of the more notable of these benefactions, however, may be 
 mentioned. In 1888 Mr. Lea erected an addition to the Philadelphia 
 Library building, doubling the size of its reading rooms and book- 
 stacks. In 1897 he erected important buildings for the Pennsyl- 
 vania Epileptic Hospital and Colony Farm at Oakbourne, Pa., and 
 subsequently paid for the erection of still other buildings, added to 
 the endowment of the institution and contributed toward its main- 
 tenance. In 1889 he offered to pay for the construction of a building 
 for the study and teaching of hygiene and bacteriology at the Uni- 
 versity. This building^was erected in 1891 and dedicated February, 
 1892. His library, as is well known, he bequeathed to the Univer- 
 sity. In addition to these and other substantial gifts to the Univer- 
 sity Mr. Lea was one of that body of generous subscribers to its 
 general expenses who have enabled it, without the large endowments 
 of the other great Eastern universities, and without the munificent 
 state appropriations of those in the West, to perform a work fully 
 commensurate with theirs. For a number of years he subscribed 
 liberally to this purpose and lightened the burden of the Provost by 
 the kindness and readiness with which he gave. 
 
 Immersed in his literary work and devoting many hours a day 
 to it, yet the courteous host of the Wistar parties, the cordial giver 
 of time and advice to any who were preparing to entertain learned 
 bodies in Philadelphia, the participant in all scholarly projects in 
 the field of history, the ready writer of communications to the public 
 journals on all large questions that arose, the persistent walker 
 through Philadelphia streets, he was certainly not a recluse. His 
 face and form were familiar to a large circle of acquaintances and 
 he welcomed callers cordially. Among his more intimate character- 
 istics during his later life may be mentioned his habit of spending 
 sorne days or weeks each year at the Delaware Water Gap, in the 
 spring when the fruit trees blossomed, and in the fall when the 
 autumn leaves were in their glory. He was always interested in 
 wild flowers, knew them and their haunts in the country and at the 
 
xii OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS DECEASED. 
 
 shore, where he spent the summer, and he even botanized among 
 the flower stands of the old colored women along Market Street. 
 He was fond of curios and semi-precious stones, attended r 
 phia sales and corresponded with dealers in such objects, and made 
 an extensive collection of Japanese pottery and bronzes, rle co - 
 lected also engravings and books on art. 
 
 But it was primarily to the work of the historian that the labors 
 of Mr. Lea were devoted during this long period of his later life; 
 and it was as a scholarly historian that he won eminence and received 
 recognition in full measure. Doctoral degrees from Giessen, Pennsyl- 
 vania, Harvard and Princeton ; fellowships or honorary or associate 
 membership in more than thirty learned societies in Germany, Italy, 
 Russia, England, Scotland and America; medals, congratulatory 
 letters and private correspondence testify to this. He was long a 
 Vice-president of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania. He was 
 urged to serve as President of the American Historical Association 
 soon after its organization, and finally consented in 1903. He could 
 not preside, as its meeting was held that year in New Orleans, and 
 he did not feel that he could make so long a journey from home, but 
 his presidential address on " Ethical Values in History " made a pro- 
 found impression at the time and was reprinted afterward. 
 
 These honors and this recognition were partly for his earlier work 
 on the history of mediaeval law, already described, but in the main an 
 acknowledgment of the series of great works which during this 
 period appeared in almost unbroken continuity. In 1888 appeared 
 the " History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages," in three vol- 
 umes ; two years afterward a volume of " Chapters from the Relig- 
 ious History of Spain Connected with the Inquisition " ; two years 
 after this he edited a " Formulary of the Papal Penitentiary " ; in 
 1896 he published his " History of Auricular Confession and Indul- 
 gences," in three volumes. Then came a period of ten years in which 
 only one volume, the " Moriscos of Spain," and some pamphlets and 
 magazine articles were pubHshed. This long passage of time was 
 due to the fact that he was preparing his largest and most important 
 work, a "History of the Inquisition of Spain," published in four 
 volumes in 1906 and 1907. In 1908 he published a " History of the 
 Inquisition in the Spanish Dependencies," and was at work last year 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA. xiii 
 
 collecting material and making notes for a "History of Witch- 
 craft," when he finally laid down his pen. 
 
 The late period of life to which this productivity extended is of 
 much significance. Few historians have died under sixty; much 
 historical writing has been done by men in their seventies; Ranke 
 and Bancroft at ninety, Mommsen at eighty-six, and Mr. Lea at 
 eighty-four are only some of the most conspicuous instances of 
 a considerable number of scholars who with unclouded clearness 
 of mind and unabated vigor of spirit were drawing on their long- 
 accumulated store of knowledge and applying their slowly ripened 
 judgment to the problems of history at more than eighty years 
 of age. 
 
 The early part of Mr. Lea's life was contemporaneous with the 
 beginnings of American historical production. The historical works 
 of Irving, " Columbus " and the " Conquest of Granada," were pub- 
 lished during Mr. Lea's earliest years. In 1834 appeared the first 
 volume of Bancroft's "History of the United States." In 1837 
 Prescott began his historical career by the publication of " Ferdi- 
 nand and Isabella." Parkman's first work, the " Conspiracy of 
 Pontiac," was published in 1851, and the first volume of Motley's 
 " Rise of the Dutch Republic " in 1856, when Mr. Lea was collecting 
 material for his " Superstition and Force." 
 
 A marked difference, however, is to be noted between the his- 
 torical work of these writers and that of Mr. Lea. Each of the five 
 chose as a subject a period of time or a series of events or a group 
 of personalities which possessed some well-defined dramatic char- 
 acter. The almost personal struggle, gigantic in significance, how- 
 ever limited in time and space, fought out in the Netherlands between 
 William of Orange and Philip of Spain, awakened the sympathetic 
 fire and was described by the literary grace of Motley. The ro- 
 mantic adventures of Cortez and Pizarro, and the scarcely less 
 stirring narrative of events in Spain during the same period gave a 
 subject of unexcelled interest to Prescott. Parkman from boy- 
 hood was attracted, as he tells us, by the picturesque surroundings 
 and incidents of the struggle for the Northern continent between 
 the Indian, the Frenchman and the Englishman. Bancroft selected 
 the early and heroic period of our own national life, and Irving 
 
 b* 
 
xiv OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS DECEASED. 
 
 equally dramatic episodes. In contrast with these Mr. Lea chose a 
 much earlier period of the world's history and a group of subjects 
 during that period of which the elements are less emotional, more 
 intellectual ; in which the problem is rather to understand than to 
 depict, rather to explain than to narrate. Whereas their periods 
 were modern, he chose the middle ages; whereas they recounted 
 principally events, he wrote principally on institutions. The medi- 
 aeval conceptions of law ; the organization, ideals, doctrines and prac- 
 tices of the mediaeval church; the origin, development, connections 
 and influence of the Inquisition, one of the most characteristic 
 embodiments of the spirit of the mediaeval church — such were the 
 great problems he took up for solution. They were narratives, of 
 course, that he wrote, as all history must be narration, but they were 
 narratives not so much of incidents in the life of certain individual 
 men as of incidents in the life of mankind. He was dealing not so 
 much with occurrences — these served as illustrations only — as with 
 the development of principles. In this more difficult and more 
 philosophical conception of history Mr. Lea was a pioneer in Amer- 
 ica, and his choice' was apparently made independently even of such 
 European scholars as had preceded him in it. 
 
 Why he made this choice has long been a matter of interest to 
 historical scholars. He himself could probably have told how rather 
 than why he took this attitude toward history. The wind of human 
 interest " bloweth where it listeth " and we seldom know just why we 
 have become so deeply interested in some one particular field of 
 knowledge or endeavor. But it is to be remembered that Mr. Lea's 
 early surroundings and interests were largely in the field of natural 
 science. The analogy between the history of institutions and the 
 study of natural history is very close. There is the same subordi- 
 nation of the individual to the type, the same interest in, logical clas- 
 sification, the same greater attention to observation than to exposi- 
 tion. It would seem entirely natural therefore that Mr. Lea, having 
 become interested in the Middle Ages, would wish to understand 
 and elucidate the rules and ideas of medi^^val law and organized 
 mediaeval religion, rather than merely to narrate the story of exter- 
 nal events during that period. 
 
 The same early interest in natural history, acting on a certain 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA. xv 
 
 type of mind and strengthened by a business training, may be the 
 clue to Mr. Lea's adoption of so distinctly scientific a method in his 
 historical work. Scientific method is much the same to whatever 
 department of knowledge it is applied. It is simply the direct 
 method, going as immediately as possible to the phenomena which 
 it is intended to observe; the objective method, treating the phe- 
 nomena without subjective distortion or personal bias; the compara- 
 tive method, treating individual examples and occurrences as mate- 
 rial for classification and generalization ; the rigorous method, using 
 only facts that can be absolutely verified, or when this is impossible 
 discriminating 'clearly the different degrees of certitude 'of facts. 
 Allowing for certain difficulties in obtaining and interpreting the 
 material with which the historian has to deal, no biologist, chemist 
 or astronomer has been more true to these canons of scientific 
 method than has Mr. Lea in his historical works. 
 
 There is one corollary of this attitude toward history, however, 
 that Mr. Lea was not willing to accept. To most scientific his- 
 torians it seems no more within their province to express ethical 
 judgments on the men and institutions of the past, or to draw prac- 
 tical lessons for the present from them than it is part of the duty of 
 any other scientific investigators. They deem their work done if 
 they observe, explain, narrate. According to their view it is no 
 more the duty of the historian to draw moral lessons than it is that 
 of the geologist or of the botanist. Mr. Lea did not feel so. In 
 the preface to his " History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages," 
 written in 1887, he said: "No serious historical work is worth the 
 writing or the reading unless it conveys a moral. ... I have not 
 paused to moralize, but I have missed my aim if the events nar- 
 rated are not so presented as to teach their appropriate lesson." His 
 practice already alluded to of bringing his stores of historical knowl- 
 edge to bear on present day questions in the form of occasional pam- 
 phlets or essays indicates the same belief, namely, that it is one of the 
 duties of the historical student to provide moral or practical teaching 
 for the community. Yet I am inclined to believe that the concep- 
 tion of the historian as also a moralist became less pronounced in 
 Mr. Lea's mind as his life went on. In his " History of the Inquisi- 
 tion of Spain " his judgments of the church are less severe than in his 
 
xvi OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS DECEASED. 
 
 earlier work on the " History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages." 
 His presidential address to the American Historical Association in 
 1903 was devoted to a vindication of Philip II. of Spain from many 
 of the charges against him, on the ground that men and institutions 
 must be judged by the moral standards of their own time, not ours. 
 He speaks of Motley's condemnation in a certain case as "the lan- 
 guage of a partisan and not of an historian," and declares that Lord 
 Acton's famous appeal, " to suffer no man and no cause to escape 
 the undying penalty which history has the power to inflict on wrong," 
 to be based on a mistaken view of the function of history. He 
 points out that " history is not to be written as a Sunday-school tale 
 for children of larger growth." He was more willing, I think, in 
 later than earlier life to tell the story and leave his readers to draw 
 what moral from it they wished. In his own words, " the historian 
 may often feel righteous indignation — or what he conceives to be 
 righteous — but he should strenuously repress it as a luxury to be 
 left to his readers." Yet he did not entirely reject his earlier view, 
 for in December, 1907, only two years before his death he wrote: 
 " I have always sought, even though infinitesimally, to contribute to 
 the betterment of the world, by indicating the consequences of evil 
 and of inconsiderate and misdirected zeal. The search for truth 
 has been stimulated by the desire to diminish the consequences of 
 error." 
 
 Yet sincerely as Mr. Lea tried to be impartial in his treatment 
 of the men and institutions of the past, he 'has been subjected to 
 serious criticism, principally from adherents of the Roman Catholic 
 Church. He has been charged with interpreting mediaeval docu- 
 ments unfairly, giving undue credit to doubtful documents because 
 they supported his views, and of allowing his general opposition to 
 Catholicism to draw him into a partisan presentation of his subject. 
 The changes have been rung on these charges in many different keys, 
 but they are all reducible to these three forms, unfair interpreta- 
 tion of the records, prejudiced acceptance of documents, and an 
 anti-Catholic propaganda under the guise of history. Much of this 
 criticism has been made by men of no standing in scholarship and 
 may be safely disregarded as unimportant. On the other hand, such 
 criticism as that of Dr. Blotzer, published in 1890 in the Historisches 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA. xvii 
 
 Jahrbuch of the Gorresgesellschaft, that of Dr. Baumgarten in his 
 book " Henry Charles Lea's Historical Writings," published in 1900, 
 and the obituary essay of Alphandery in the Revue de I'Histoire des 
 Religions since Mr. Lea's death, must be given the respect due to 
 serious scholarly opinion. The validity of these criticisms can of 
 course only be tested by scholars in the same field. But one or two 
 general observations may be made concerning them. In so far as 
 the statements refer to the validity or meaning of documents, that is 
 a scholar's question, the kind of question that arises in all fields of 
 investigation, that always must arise, and in which Mr. Lea would 
 have been the first to disclaim for himself infallibility. One of the 
 difficulties of such criticism, however, is shown in a curious slip 
 made by one of Mr. Lea's most learned critics, Professor Baum- 
 garten, of Munich. He endeavors to show at some length that Mr. 
 Lea is mistaken in what he says of the mediaeval rules for keeping 
 holy the Sabbath day. But Mr. Lea was speaking not of keeping 
 the Sabbath, the first day of the week, but of the forbidden meeting 
 of witches with the devil, which was known as the " witch Sabbat," 
 and he was absolutely correct in what he said. Professor Baum- 
 garten is learned, but he does not happen to be learned in the history 
 of witchcraft, where this expression belongs. As a further indica- 
 tion of the purely academic character of much of this criticism it 
 may be remarked that a Catholic reviewer of Baumgarten's attack 
 upon Mr. Lea while agreeing with him in this part of his work, 
 proceeds to criticise Baumgarten's own work so severely as quite to 
 take the edge off his harsh judgment of the American scholar. 
 
 But such criticisms, whether correct or mistaken, belong in the 
 realm of knowledge, not of motive. In answer to charges of bias, 
 intentional partisanship or unfairness, one can only cite Mr. Lea's 
 own ideals and practices and the weight of opinion of thoughtful 
 readers of his works. In this regard it is to be noted that many 
 Catholic scholars are included among his unquestioning admirers, 
 and all acknowledge the weight of his scholarship. The very latest 
 criticism of an adverse nature closes by speaking of him as ce bon 
 ouvrier de verite, " this good laborer for the truth." Mr. Lea him- 
 self would have wished for no better description. 
 
 But there is stronger testimony from the Catholic side. On 
 
xviii OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS DECEASED. 
 
 December 19, 1896, Lord Acton, an English Catholic scholar, who 
 had already expressed in the reviews a high opinion of Mr. Lea's 
 work, wrote to him describing the project of the " Cambridge Modern 
 History," which has now become so well known, and asking him to 
 write a chapter in the first volume to be called " The Eve of the 
 Reformation." In his letter Lord Acton uses the following expres- 
 sions : " This is the important and most critical and cardinal chap- 
 ter, which I am anxious to be allowed to place in your hands. . . . 
 It is clear that you are the one indicated and predestined writer, 
 there is no one else. ... I know of none whom I could go to if you 
 refuse." Mr. Lea replied in letters dated January 7 and March 22, 
 1897, giving a somewhat reluctant consent, and pointing out that such 
 an article must contain many of the same statements that he had 
 already made in his published works. In reply Lord Acton wrote, 
 April 4, saying : " I sincerely thank you for the honor you do me in 
 giving the aid of your hand and the sanction of your name to our 
 international undertaking. . . . Your last work contains almost all 
 I am asking for, ten times told and full measure running over." 
 After some other intervening letters, the correspondence was re- 
 sumed in March and April, 1898, when Mr. Lea sent the manuscript 
 of the chapter, which was acknowledged by Lord Acton with renewed 
 thanks, and eventually printed exactly as written. Eight years later, 
 after Lord Acton's death, during a controversy that arose concern- 
 ing his Catholic orthodoxy, a correspondent in the Tablet, a London 
 Catholic journal, denied that Lord Acton had asked Mr. Lea to 
 write this famous chapter. In answer to this Mr. Lea prepared a 
 communication to the same paper giving an outline of the corre- 
 spondence which I have just described. Before sending this letter, 
 however, he saw an article in the London Times of October 30, 1906, 
 by the present Lord Acton, upholding his father's orthodoxy. In a 
 spirit of kindliness, and fearing to make this filial task more difficult, 
 Mr. Lea decided not to send the correction he had prepared, laid 
 it away among his papers, and the facts are now made public for 
 the first time. 
 
 Even his severest Catholic critics ha,ve restricted their condemna- 
 tion to a few parts of his work. There is not one of them that fails 
 to bow to the extent, the depth and the minuteness of his knowl- 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA. xix 
 
 edge. One speaks of his "welcome collection and exposition of 
 important and universally interesting material for church history, 
 grandiose capacity for labor, the use of inclusive and often obscure 
 sources and works of literature," another of the "long and clear 
 paths he has drawn through the masses of fact he has collected." 
 
 The truth is Mr. Lea was a man who keenly resented injustice, 
 was shocked by unnecessary suffering and deplored waste. In eccle- 
 siastical history he found much that seemed to him worthy of con- 
 demnation, and he condemned it often in unsparing terms, blaming 
 freely men whose actions he thought wicked, and institutions which 
 he thought conducive to the perpetuation of injustice and the inflic- 
 tion of undeserved suffering. Those, on the other hand, who look 
 on the dominant influences of the middle ages with especial sym^ 
 pathy, or feel called upon to defend the Catholic church from criti- 
 cism, have deeply resented this condemnation. They feel that Mr. 
 Lea has not given the other and pleasanter side of the story, that 
 he has not pointed out the amelioration of society, the consolation 
 to individuals, the gentler and kindlier services of the mediaeval 
 church. Yet in all fairness it is to be remembered that Mr. Lea's 
 studies led him through dark stretches of human history, that the 
 weight of " man's inhumanity to man " must often have pressed 
 heavily upon his spirit, that sympathy with suffering, resentment 
 against injustice, hatred of oppression, and grief over ignorance and 
 prejudice must often have made their appeal rather to the warm 
 emotions of the man than to the cold impartiality of the historian. 
 Which of us could read the sad records of the Inquisition, analyze 
 the motives of men who were a disgrace to the high office of the 
 papacy, describe the work of the visible church through periods from 
 which even the most devout of churchmen turn away sick at heart, 
 and still possess always a judjcial calm and a sympathetic spirit? 
 And yet through all his studies Mr. Lea preserved moderate judg- 
 ment, optimism and belief in the essential goodness of human nature. 
 
 Yet it is not the moral judgments expressed in Mr. Lea's, writ- 
 ings that have most impressed scholars. It -is the mass, solidity and 
 originality of his knowledge, the minuteness of his research, and 
 the extent of his production. The larger works that I have before 
 enumerated amount to seventeen volumes. Several of them have 
 
XX OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS DECEASED. 
 
 been reissued in successive editions, in each case with revision, 
 eliminations and additions. Many of his pamphlets, articles in jour- 
 nals and other minor works, have involved much original investi- 
 gation of the same kind as that made for his larger works. The 
 extent of this investigation is indicated by thousands of references 
 to works of the most technical and recondite character, in at least 
 seven languages ; to manuscripts belonging to remote periods, pub- 
 lished in obscure localities, often by almost unknown authors, and 
 difficult of access. In addition to these printed references are num- 
 berless pencilled notes, comments and other evidences of use scat- 
 tered through the books in his library. 
 
 In order to carry out his work as he had planned it, especially his 
 later volumes, it was necessary to make use of records in European 
 depositaries which were still unprinted. The University of Oxford 
 by special resolution ordered that any manuscripts in the Bodleian 
 library needed by Mr. Lea in his work should be sent to America 
 for his use; but in the case of archives this was obviously impos- 
 sible. He was disinclined to go to Europe, and his means enabled 
 him to make use of another alternative. This was to have copies of 
 these manuscripts made by copyists there and sent over to him. Of 
 course much was thus obtained of which he could make no use, but 
 much was invaluable, and had never before been used by any scholar. 
 Some two hundred bundles of manuscripts are now on his library 
 shelves, all of which have been annotated throughout with his fine 
 handwriting, and marked as having been copied, excerpted from, 
 and otherwise utilized or discarded. Only two years before his 
 death he arranged with M. Salomon Reinach to have a mass of 
 material for his " History of Witchcraft " copied at the Cabinet de 
 MSS. in Paris, and this he was engaged in examining, as it reached 
 him, during the last weeks of his life. 
 
 The great volume of Mr. Lea's accomplishment, combined with 
 his practice of having unprinted material copied and sent to him 
 from Europe, has given rise to a strange misconception of his habits 
 of work. One of his critics suggested that Mr. Lea, being a man 
 of wealth, might have secured the services of others; another that 
 his numerous references to obscure sources pointed to his possession 
 of a large body of detailed quotations which could be used by him 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA. xxi 
 
 in constructing his books. A third critic copied and developed these 
 suggestions, till, according to the well-known process of the growth 
 of a legend, it has been stated in a French journal that much of 
 Mr. Lea's work was done for him by assistants, that he kept a 
 card catalogue of quotations and references, and that his work 
 was largely a mosaic made by putting together these materials 
 gathered by others. Nothing could be more absurdly untrue. No 
 scholar ever worked more absolutely independently than he, few 
 ever worked more completely alone. He never employed a secretary 
 or clerk, never dictated a letter. Just as his library was collected 
 according to his own judgment, just as the material for his writing 
 was collected by himself, so his books were written from his own brain 
 and by his own hand in the most literal sense of the word. He, 
 never spared himself labor in his writing. When his " History of 
 the Inquisition of Spain" was ready for the press it bade fair to 
 occupy six large volumes. After serious thought Mr. Lea decided 
 that this was too long, and notwithstanding his eighty years of age 
 and a pressing realization of the possibility that death might over- 
 take him with the work of half a lifetime incomplete, he quietly 
 set himself to the task of rewriting the six thousand pages with his 
 own pen in shorter form, and within a year completed his task, 
 reducing it from the six volumes to four. Surely this was a high 
 instance of courage and the simple dignity of the scholar. No haste 
 to appear before the public, no pretense, no boasting, no complaint ; 
 simply a sincere and loyal recognition of the claims of scholarship, 
 and a willingness to grapple with all the difficulties of his subject, 
 whatever form they might take. 
 
 Those who are familiar with Mr. Lea's methods of work know 
 how he accomplished so much. Day after day, month after month, 
 year after year, he labored constantly, usually six or more hours a 
 day, with intense and concentrated yet alert and interested applica- 
 tion. He often expressed his joy in the combat with a student's 
 difificulties, his pleasure in labor, his satisfaction in achievement. 
 Although his health was by no means constantly good, yet for sixty- 
 five years he did not spend the whole of any one day in bed. During 
 many years of his later life he sat down regularly to his desk at 
 two or three o'clock in the afternoon and worked until dinner time. 
 
xxii OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS DECEASED. 
 
 Then in the evening he began again and worked until eleven. And 
 this occurred seven days in the week. 
 
 He began a new subject by copying, translating, tabulating and 
 summarizing his sources, in his own clear handwriting, on sheets of 
 paper, with such comments and cross references as occurred to him 
 in the course of his work. Great stacks of such sheets he took away 
 with him to the seashore in summer, and classified, combined and 
 re-read them there. He made it a practice never to begin to write 
 a book until he had all the material he intended to use in it collected 
 and classified. Thus in some cases he spent literally years in gath- 
 ering material before he had written a word of his book in its final 
 form ; and when he came to write he wrote almost entirely from this 
 highly organized material. Similarly he never sent any part of his 
 work to the printer until the whole book was completed and revised 
 in manuscript form. If this patient, systematic, self-controlled 
 method of work is compared with the restless, hurried, confused 
 and broken way in which most of our production is carried on, it is 
 not hard to solve the riddle of his great accomplishment. 
 
 He obtained singularly little help from others. In his early years he 
 had, as has been seen, a first rate general education and good literary 
 training. But when he once entered upon the difficult road of his- 
 torical investigation, he traveled alone. He overcame its difficulties 
 with native genius but with much tribulation. His search for the 
 bibliography of his subject was a hard one. He learned new lan- 
 guages as he felt the necessity for them. He has himself left a 
 record of his regret " that there were no scholars here to whom he 
 could look for guidance in the paths which he desired to follow," 
 and that " as a solitary student he was obliged to collect around him 
 the necessary material." This detachment from other scholars 
 working in the same line had distinct disadvantages. The editions 
 of the sources which he used were in many cases not the best, or 
 those that gave the most help, and he did not obtain assistance that 
 lay at hand in journals devoted to the investigation of mediseval 
 history and in modern works in allied subjects. On the other hand, 
 this same independence in his work gave a distinction and an indi- 
 viduality to his thought and writing that added immensely to its 
 effectiveness. He saved much time from controversy, and he studied 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA. xxiii 
 
 and wrote with a directness that vyould have been impossible if he 
 had paid more attention to current writings and discussions in his 
 field. He seldom asked or obtained either information or ideas 
 from other scholars. But this arose from no sense of separation, 
 depreciation or jealousy. It was simply the result of his lifelong 
 habits of work. He had chosen his field for himself, tilled it in 
 his own way and reaped its harvest with the labor of his own hands. 
 
 He had much pleasant correspondence with prominent European 
 and American scholars. He was always ready to talk freely to his 
 visitors and, so far as he took the time to read recent works, cor- 
 dially praised many of them. He closed his address as President 
 of the American Historical Association in December, 1903, with 
 the following words of appreciative recognition of the work of 
 younger men: "As one of the last survivors of a past generation, 
 whose career is rapidly nearing its end, in bidding you farewell I 
 may perhaps be permitted to express the gratification with which, 
 during nearly half a century, I have watched the development of 
 historical work among us in the adoption of scientific methods. 
 Year after year I have marked with growing pleasure the evidence 
 of thorough and earnest research on the part of a constantly increas- 
 ing circle of well-trained scholars, who have no cause to shun com- 
 parison with those of the older hemisphere. In such hands the 
 future of the American school of history is safe, and we can look 
 forward with assurance to the honored position which it will assume 
 in the literature of the world." 
 
 The deepest impression made by a survey of the career of Mr. 
 Lea as an historian is an overwhelming sense of the impoverishment 
 of the world of scholarship now that he has gone from it. Doubt- 
 less the careful, systematic, scientific study of the past will go on; 
 science is continuous and progressive, history will more and more 
 be' studied and written as he has studied and written it. Doubtless 
 others will rise up in his place to continue his work. Confidence in the 
 future of historical investigation could not be expressed more strongly 
 than he himself has expressed it in the words I have just quoted. And 
 yet the broad outlook, the massive acquirements, the trained capacity, 
 the patient industry,, the indomitable perseverance, the sustained in- 
 terest, the alert and ardent mind of this great scholar, — how can we 
 
xxiv OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS DECEASED. 
 
 spare them from historical research and writing ? When shall we again 
 have the clear-eyed layman investigating subjects left too generally 
 by custom to the churchman? Where can we seek for the intel- 
 lectual courage that will extend its view over so many centuries, and 
 the industry that will prepare itself so thoroughly for the combat 
 with their difficulties? What capacities scattered among many pos- 
 sessors will make up for the combination of powers in on.e person- 
 ality? What later travelers along the way of historical study will 
 see so widely, observe so keenly and record so well as this first and 
 greatest of American scientific historians? 
 
 The President : 
 
 The next speaker will be our fellow member, the Right Hon. 
 James Bryce, the British Ambassador — a conspicuous representative 
 of the culture of the old world as Mr. Lea was of the culture of 
 the new. 
 
 The Right Honorable James Bryce: 
 
 I am asked to speak to you about one of the greatest historians 
 of our time ; to do so is for me not only an honor, but also a duty, 
 because I was privileged during many years to enjoy his friendship, 
 first given to me as a friend and pupil of Mr. Goldwin Smith, and 
 because I am probably the only member of the British Academy, a 
 body of which he had been elected some time ago a foreign member, 
 who is now resident in this country. 
 
 Of his public life as a citizen and of his character in its various 
 private relations, others here can speak with knowledge fuller than 
 mine; yet I must not forget to dwell upon and gratefully acknowl- 
 edge the uniform kindness which he showed to us younger men 
 when we approached him, and which witnessed to the genial warmth 
 of his heart. What I have now to say will refer to him as a his- 
 torical scholar and author. 
 
 Anyone asked to say what are the qualities needed for the writing 
 of history might enumerate them as follows: diligence, patience, 
 accuracy, the power of critical discrimination, impartiality, penetra- 
 tion, judgment. All these are qualities which belong to the sub- 
 stance of historical writing. As regards its form, one would par- 
 ticularly specify the power of clear statement and the gift of putting 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA. XXV 
 
 color and life into narration, together with those other attributes 
 which make up what we call " brilliancy of style." 
 
 Let us consider Mr. Lea's intellect and the work which it pro- 
 duced with reference to the various attributes I have enumerated, 
 and let us begin with the form of his work and of those things 
 which belong to style and manner. 
 
 That which is called literary excellence, i. e., the charms and 
 allurements of style, was never very much in Mr. Lea's mind and 
 was altogether subordinated to a consideration of the matter to be 
 dealt with. Whether it was that he did not think that his talents 
 lay in the purely literary direction or that he did not much care for 
 the graces of composition, reckoning merits of form as trifling com- 
 pared to merits of substance, he paid cotnparatively little regard to 
 the adornment of that which he had to say. In this respect he would 
 have satisfied — as indeed he anticipated — the canons of what is now 
 called the scientific treatment of history. But his writing had that 
 which is the greatest merit of style, perfect clearness, both in the 
 statement of facts and in the exposition of his views of the facts. 
 It was always plain, direct, intelligible, and with that he was content. 
 The facts were so interesting to him, and he felt that an exact state- 
 ment of them ought to be so interesting to all scholars, that he never 
 spent any time on decking them out with any rhetorical embellish- 
 ments. If his manner may be called level and business-like, it is 
 never dull, because the essential facts are carefully selected, words 
 are not wasted, the matter is so stated as to go straight home to the 
 reader's mind. 
 
 Now let us return to those attributes of the historian which 
 relate to the substance of his work. 
 
 His industry was above all praise. For fifty years he labored 
 incessantly on his researches, giving to them in earlier days all the 
 time that he could spare from his business and his public duties as a 
 good citizen, and in later days devoting to them practically all his 
 working time. When his health became comparatively weak, he so 
 arranged his life as to reserve all his forces for study and com- 
 position. Just so much open air exercise was taken as the interests 
 of health required, and every moment that could be given to the 
 library was given. 
 
xxvi OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS DECEASED. 
 
 Nothing could exceed the care and patience with which he in- 
 vestigated the sources from which he drew his materials. He veri- 
 fied every reference, he neglected no out-of-the-way authority from 
 which information could be obtained. Few recent writers have had 
 their statements so seldom questioned, and rarely indeed was he 
 proved to be in error. He rightly held accuracy to be the first of 
 all the historian's aims and the highest test of the historian's excel- 
 lence. The splendid library which he accumulated by the labor 
 of many years, fortunately enabled him to have on his own shelves 
 an unusually large number of the books that he required, while his 
 means were sufficiently large to bear the cost of procuring copies 
 of manuscripts preserved in European collections. Neither trouble 
 nor expense was spared in procuring these essential materials. It 
 need hardly be said that whoever travels through unexplored terri- 
 tory, relying upon original sources, many of which have never been 
 properly scrutinized, needs a high measure of critical insight. 
 Whether nature gave Mr. Lea that capacity, or whether he acquired 
 it by long experience, it certainly had reached in him an unusually 
 high development, and this is one of the features of his books which 
 gives them their permanent worth. In accompanying him one feels 
 one's self always on firm ground. 
 
 Some of the subjects which he treated at great length, such as 
 his monumental histories of the Inquisition in Southern France and 
 in Spain and his history of clerical celibacy, deal with subjects in 
 which freedom from any bias or prepossession, whether religious or 
 political, is specially needful, and indeed one may say essential in 
 order to secure the confidence of all readers, whether Roman Catholic 
 or Protestant. Mr. Lea was a Protestant by birth and conviction, 
 but he was, as a scholar ought to be, perfectly fair in his treatment 
 of ecclesiastical and religious questions. , One may indeed say that 
 scholarship fails to bear one of its best fruits if it fails to make 
 a man impartial in handling ecclesiastical history. His books were 
 never written with any purpose or bias save that of eliciting the 
 facts. To write in such a spirit was far rarer in the days when 
 Mr. Lea began his work than it is in our time. Religious prejudices 
 were so strong and so general among both Protestants and Roman 
 Catholics that it was quite unusual to find a writer in whom you 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA. xxvii 
 
 could not discover immediately that he wrote with either a Protestant 
 or a Roman Catholic color. But it may be said of Mr. Lea that he 
 not only never suppressed evidence, but also that he always treated 
 evidence in a purely judicial spirit, endeavoring to give its due 
 weight to every item, whether or not it fell in with any theory that 
 he might have formed or any notions he had entertained. In one 
 of the last conversations I was privileged to have with him he told 
 me that he had been surprised when he investigated the subject to 
 find that the Inquisition, terrible as it was, put to death by no means 
 so many persons as was commonly believed. 
 
 When after weighing the evidence and reviewing the facts 
 established, he had to deliver his own judgment upon them, it was 
 sure to be both a cautious and a weighty judgment. To large 
 generalizations he was not very prone, feeling the dangers that 
 lurked in them, and feeling also that if the facts are fully and care- 
 fully stated, scholars at least may generally be left to draw their 
 proper conclusions from them. Great historians may be recognized 
 hardly more by the fine quality than by the small quantity of the 
 general theories they propound. It is the untrained men who are 
 alike facile and feeble in their speculations. 
 
 One feature of Mr. Lea's judgment deserves to be noted because 
 it is one which, although apparently discarded by some among the 
 most recent school of scientific historians, was placed in the fore- 
 front of an historian's merits by a great man whom it is a pleasure 
 to name as a warm admirer of Mr. Lea's work, I mean the late 
 Lord Acton. Mr. Lea was sparing in condemnation, for he had a 
 charitable mind, and he was not copious in moralizing reflections, 
 but he carried a clear and sound moral sense into all his judgments. 
 Cruelty and perfidy and rapacity were hateful to him wherever they 
 were found. Their foulness was not to be palliated by dwelling on 
 the distinction between the standards of one age and another. 
 There are, no doubt, many offences to which we ought to give a 
 greater indulgence when we meet them in past times than we should 
 give them now, but even in the rudest communities these three sins 
 always were sins as they always will be sins, and, as Lord Acton 
 used to say, they ought not to be excused by any differences of time 
 or country. 
 
xxviii OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS DECEASED. 
 
 I may sum up the impression which Mr. Lea's intellectual char- 
 acter and attitude leave upon his readers and left most of all upon 
 those who knew him personally, by saying that he loved truth with 
 a whole-hearted devotion. The love of truth is the compass by 
 which an historian must steer. It is the highest quality in the in- 
 vestigator, whether his subject be human things or external nature. 
 It was his love of truth that made him so diligent and exact and 
 scrupulous in the study of his authorities and in the statement of 
 his results. It is this quality above all that distinguishes men like 
 Hallam and Stubbs, Maitland and Gardiner, and in this country men 
 like Parkman and your latest historian of the United States, Mr. 
 James Ford Rhodes, from the mere litterateur, however brilliant a 
 stylist he may be, who occupies himself with history because it is a 
 subject which lends itself to literary effect. And I may perhaps 
 add that we in England feel doubly grateful to the United States 
 when she gives us an historian who makes to European history con- 
 tributions of permanent value. In observing the widespread and 
 eager activity with which, in this country, yotir younger students 
 are devoting themselves to the history of the thirteen colonies and 
 of the United States in all its ramifications, I have sometimes been 
 inclined to wish that more of them occupied themselves with the 
 history of Europe, which, after all, is a part of your own history, 
 because you are yourselves a European people, although settled in 
 another hemisphere. Mr. Lea is a bright example of the services 
 which an American historian, standing outside the strifes and preju- 
 dices that still affect the minds of many European writers, can ren- 
 der to branches of history which eminently require calm and dispas- 
 sionate investigation. 
 
 The vision rises before me of our venerable friend as I used to 
 see him sitting in his library, surrounded by books that rose from 
 the floor to the ceiling — rows of precious volumes which he had 
 gathered with such painstaking diligence — ^happy among them, gentle 
 and serene in aspect, and pursuing his labors in an old age which 
 had left him in full possession of his admirable powers, wise and 
 just, zealous and untiring as ever in the pursuit' of truth. He 
 thought nothing of fame. He did not seek for recognition either at 
 home or abroad, and the circle from which he received recognition 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA. xxix 
 
 was the comparatively narrow one of scholars who were able to 
 appreciate what he had done for them. But he has set before us 
 a splendid example of single-minded devotion to the enlargement of 
 knowledge, and has given us a great mass of first rate original work, 
 work which has stood and will stand the test of criticism. This 
 work of his, covering some of the most obscure and difficult branches 
 of research and throwing new light into many a dark corner of the 
 past, will perpetuate his name and win for it a gratitude of many 
 generations of historical scholars. 
 The President: 
 
 It is a great pleasure not to introduce, but to present to you 
 Dr. Horace Howard Furness, the speaker on behalf of the Library 
 Company of Philadelphia, one of the foremost of Shajcespearean 
 scholars, the genial friend not only of Mr. Lea, but of our entire 
 community. 
 
 Dr. Horace Howard Furness : 
 
 Mr. President, Fellow Members of the Philosophical Society, 
 Ladies and Gentlemen: Lincoln in his immortal Gettysburg address 
 taught us, I think, the spirit in which to observe commemorative 
 services. The deeds that men have done, the tasks they have 
 achieved — these endure, and our commemorations are for our own 
 benefit, not for the honor of those whose hands have ceased from 
 their labor. By rehearsing their victories, we are, ourselves, urged 
 forward, and in following their example our truest commemoration 
 is found. 
 
 And who would not gladly be a humble follower of such a leader 
 as he whom we have met this evening to commemorate? From 
 mouths of wiser censure than mine you have listened to a review of 
 his manifold talents and activities. A man so various that he 
 seemed to be not one but all good men's epitome. Of Sir Walter 
 Scott, \vho for twenty-five years performed the arduous and varied 
 duties of Sheriff and Clerk of the Session, it has been said that an 
 historian of Edinburgh could hardly escape the conviction that dur- 
 ing those years there must have been in that city and at the same 
 time, two utterly dissimilar men, both bearing the same name, 
 the one a poet and literary man of commanding genius and the 
 
XXX OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS. 
 
 other a great citizen, ever in public and active civic life. Would 
 not an historian of Philadelphia come to the same conclusion and 
 express his conviction that there were here in Philadelphia during 
 the last half century two men both bearing the identical name, 
 Henry Charles Lea ? One striving and prominent in the heady fight 
 of politics and reform ; and the other a modest, sequestered scholar, 
 leading a cloistered life of historical research. 
 
 ' Far, far indeed behind his worth come all the praises we can 
 now bestow.' 
 
 I cannot analyze his character. His loss to me is too recent 
 and we are all too close to him. My few words cannot but be 
 stammering; if haply they only be coherent. 
 
 Whatever may be the qualities demanded in a scholar, and espe- 
 cially in an historian, accuracy in statement stands preeminent. It 
 is the foundation of his work ; on it rests the whole superstructure — 
 a taint of suspicion of a scholar's truth is the fly which ruins the 
 apothecary's ointment. 
 
 In this accuracy Mr. Lea ranks among the highest. The sources 
 whence he drew his statements cannot be impugned. They are the 
 very words of the speakers, the very acts of the governments, the 
 very decrees of the church. And of them he urges upon the reader 
 no interpretation drawn from imagination, or tinged by prejudice. 
 He gives the documents themselves, from which the interpretation 
 to be drawn is the bare, unqualified meaning of the very words 
 themselves. 
 
 And herein he reveals to us the lofty attribute of pure intelli- 
 gence; pure intelligence is absolutely cold and impartial. This im- 
 personality elevates his writings to the ruthless dignity of a scroll 
 of fate. Here are your facts. Lament, deplore, extenuate as you 
 will, but deny you cannot. 
 
 Obedient to this high attitude, an historian need not point the 
 moral. Whoso cannot of himself find the moral, for him will Clio 
 forever inscribe her scrolls in vain. We need no elimination of the 
 personal question when we read Lea's general conclusions drawn 
 from a survey of the whole field; and, in less prejudiced and less 
 impartial hands, we all know how vulnerable such general surveys 
 are apt to be. 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA. xxxi 
 
 For an historian to attain, however, an eminence from which he 
 can sweep the horizon, he must be, with a cool head and unclouded 
 brain, omnipresent in the times whereof he writes. There must be 
 not only no point of the horizon, political, ethical, and ecclesiastical, 
 which he has not scanned ; but also the manners, the customs, the 
 complex trending of thought, the very form and pressure of the 
 age and body of the time, must be as familiar to him as are those 
 of his own. To accomplish this as thoroughly as Lea accomplished 
 it, demands exhaustive research, wide reading, digesting, collating, 
 analysis, and all held in memory to the point of saturation. In the 
 presence of such an achievement, as we find again and again in 
 Lea's works, we can only stand in mute respect and admiration, 
 tempered with what is akin to awe. To achieve this, difficult as it 
 is, is a duty imposed on every historian; and, recognizing this duty 
 as "the stern daughter of the voice of God," Lea obeyed it. 
 
 John Fiske is said to have observed that " the life of the wisest 
 man is chiefly made up of lost opportunities, defeated hopes, and 
 half finished products." 
 
 Is this true of our friend? Ah no! In moments of quiet re- 
 flection, when to the sessions of sweet, silent thought he summoned 
 up remembrance of things past, he could not but have been con- 
 scious that instead of losing opportunities, he had created them ; 
 instead of hopes defeated, he could count hopes triumphant ; instead 
 of products half finished, he had rounded full and complete the 
 work of a lifetime wherein no hour was wasted. At such seasons, 
 with his keen insight into human nature, he could not but have been 
 conscious that he had bequeathed to the world a legacy, in com- 
 parison wherewith wealth turns to apples of Sodom and the clusters 
 of Gomorrah. Here is a legacy free to all and the more it is used 
 the wider grows its beneficence and value. It thrives by wasting. 
 
 Surely, surely, he could have harbored never a doubt as to its 
 permanence. In dreaming over its future, well might he have mur- 
 mured to himself with haughty truth : 
 
 " Et tunc magna mei sub terras ibit imago." 
 
 " A man's light," says Jeremy Taylor, " burns awhile and then 
 turns blue and faint, and he goes to converse with spirits ; then he 
 
xxxii OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS. 
 
 hands his taper to another." But where shall we find him who is 
 worthy to accept Lea's taper? Of him who shall venture to hold 
 it, it will crave wary walking to keep its flame as pure and bright as 
 when it illumined the pages beneath Lea's own hand ; — those pages 
 which will endure, which cannot but endure. Is it exaggeration 
 to paraphrase Dr. Johnson and assert that, " time which is continu- 
 ally washing away the dissoluble fabric of other writers will pass 
 without injury the adamant" of the "History of the Inquisition"? 
 
 And now, as a last word, when the image of the friend, admired 
 and respected by us all, and so dear to some of us, rises before 
 me, I would fain in this present circle, close-knit as we are by a 
 common emotion, breathe one low-toned word of sympathy with 
 those from whom as husband and father, it was to him so bitter a 
 pang to part. 
 
 Before that sad group we can only stand at a distance with heads 
 bowed and in silence. 
 
 " Fear no more the heat of the sun 
 Nor the furious winter's rages : 
 Thou thy worldly task hast done 
 Home art gone and ta'en thy wages." 
 
 " The ground that gave him first has him again. 
 His pleasures here are past, so is his pain." 
 
 The President: 
 
 The speaker on behalf of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania 
 was to have been Mr. Joseph G. Rosengarten, of Philadelphia, but 
 serious illness in his family prevents him from being here. He has 
 therefore requested Professor Jastrow, of the University of Penn- 
 sylvania, to read his remarks. 
 
 Address of Mr. Joseph G. Rosengarten : 
 
 The world-wide reputation of Mr. Lea as a historian forms the 
 fitting complement to the affectionate esteem with which his memory 
 is rightly cherished by his fellow citizens of Philadelphia. As a 
 reformer he initiated basic changes in our municipal methods. His 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA. xxxiii 
 
 services to the United States Government began early in the troubled 
 days of the Civil War, when with a few friends he joined the 
 Union League, and with his pen aroused Union sentiment to thought- 
 ful action in that great crisis. When troops were to be raised he 
 was the most active member of a commission of citizens who admin- 
 istered honestly and efficiently the large sums expended in bounties 
 and in organizing the volunteers. At the end of long years of 
 sharp and often bitter contests with the Federal authorities, Mr. 
 Lea earned the hearty praise of General James B. Fry, the provost- 
 marshal-general, for his honest and capable management of local 
 recruiting in the interest of the United States, the state and the 
 city. His pamphlets and verses formed frec^uent contributions to 
 the cause, and the Union League may well be proud of the effective 
 help given in this way at a trying time. 
 
 Equally characteristic of the man was his action in resigning 
 from the League some years later on account of its refusal to throw 
 its influence on behalf of municipal refoi^m when Mr. Lea and his 
 associates were waging their war against corruption in local poli- 
 tics and administration. He led the attack on the Public Buildings 
 Commission, and originated the Citizens' Municipal Reform Asso- 
 ciation to reform the government of the city and secure a better 
 class of representatives in the legislature. It carried on the contest 
 largely with the help of Mr. Lea's vigorous pen. His newspaper 
 articles and pamphlets brought home to the people the need of 
 sweeping changes. Much of what he thus advocated was secured 
 in the new Constitution, and the convention that drafted that instru- 
 ment drew largely from Mr. Lea's powerful arguments. It was 
 chiefly owing to his well-directed attacks that the Gas Trust fell at 
 last, thus relieving the city of a heavy burden of corruption. Again, 
 as a member of the Committee of One Hundred, Mr. Lea gave 
 direction to its efforts to secure good city government. What he 
 did in municipal affairs he sought to do in state and national mat- 
 ters. He was a strong and active advocate of civil service reform 
 and urged the introduction of the merit system of admission to 
 civil service appointments by open examination. 
 
 One, of his old and earnest associates says that " Mr. Lea was 
 the pioneer in the cause of honest government, and to him above 
 
xxxiv OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS. 
 
 any other man is due the credit of first organizing the reform senti- 
 ment in Philadelphia into a body capable of real work." 
 
 Later, when he was more deeply engrossed in his splendid lit- 
 erary work, although not in good health, he helped in spirit and in 
 the most substantial way the cause of good government. His deep 
 interest in his native city was maintained till the end of his life. 
 Keenly alive to its honor, he set an example of civic duty that is 
 unfortunately not common in men of his type of mind. He realized 
 better than most of us that good government can only be achieved 
 by the harmonious and hearty cooperation of all classes of the com- 
 munity in civic afi'airs. 
 
 The same industry that had made him as a mere boy a contrib- 
 utor of scientific articles to leading journals, and enabled him to 
 learn from his father's life-long devotion to scientific research, in 
 maturer years made him a welcome contributor to the leading news- 
 papers and periodicals on topics that appealed to the public, for 
 he was a recognized authority on all public questions that he dis- 
 cussed. 
 
 As late as 1897 he drafted for his associates in Philadelphia an 
 admirable appeal to the Senate of the United States for the prompt 
 ratification of the treaty with Great Britain, providing for the arbi- 
 tration of international questions when not settled by the ordinary 
 process of diplomacy. In it he showed his mastery of large and 
 important issues, and put in clear, crisp, significant sentences the 
 reasons that justified a new departure in the interests of peace. 
 
 A complete bibliography of all his contributions on public topics 
 would be a very long one, and would bring home to his fellow- 
 citizens a realizing sense of how useful Mr. Lea was to them, to the 
 community in which he lived, to the state, and to the nation, for all 
 of which he labored with such unselfish zeal. 
 
 An interest in public affairs and an ability to discuss them on the 
 highest plane, may have been inherited from his grandfather, 
 iMathew Carey, a man of mark in the early days of the Republic. 
 But the grandson was not only a successful publisher and a man 
 active in affairs ; he was also a diligent student, and even during the 
 trying days of the Civil War and in the turmoil of discussion of 
 municipal questions, in the quiet of his own study he was accumu- 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA. xxxv 
 
 lating the material for that succession of his historical works which 
 have made him famous as a historian, foremost in the world in the 
 subjects that he made his own. 
 
 Preoccupied as he was, he gave freely of his time and money to 
 charities, public work and educational schemes. For years a direc- 
 tor of the Philadelphia Library, he gave it a large reading-room that 
 doubled its usefulness. A trustee of the University, he gave it the 
 laboratory of hygiene, and by his will made it the ultimate owner of 
 his splendid library, a collection of original historical works and 
 material for historical research that will attract earnest students 
 for all time. In his own busy life he always welcomed students to 
 his library, and its treasures were put freely at the disposal of all 
 who shared his own love of truth and the lessons to be learned by 
 a diligent and intelligent use of the real sources of history, the 
 original works and manuscript records gathered by him from for- 
 eign archives and repositories. 
 
 Without the gift of oratory, or even a fondness or willingness 
 for public speaking, he used his pen effectively during an excep- 
 tionally long and active life in promoting a sound system of 
 good government, and threW' a new light on complicated historical 
 questions, all with a lofty spirit, a love of truth, and a zeal to help 
 the world on in its upward progress. Impartial, unpartisan, in- 
 spired always and only by an unselfish aim, and without any personal 
 ambition or desire for fame, Mr. Lea was a citizen of whom his 
 native city and country may well be proud. 
 
 Honors came to him in the recognition from scholars and learned 
 institutions, and from the leaders of public thought at home and 
 abroad, but unaffected by them except as they furnished him an 
 assurance of the service that his arduous labors had rendered, he 
 retained the same simple truth-loving and truth-seeking spirit from 
 boyliood to the end of his useful and honored life. It is character- 
 istic of the man that oblivious to the steady growth of his fame as a 
 scholar, which was even more rapid abroad than at home, his work 
 continued steadfast and untiring. 
 
 His strength and his life ended before he could complete the 
 " History of Witchcraft " in hand at the time of his death. Much 
 original material was collected from various sources, and more 
 
xxxvi OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS. 
 
 came after that active brain was stilled, and that busy pen fallen 
 from his hand. A great amount of notes was made by him with 
 the careful thoroughness so characteristic of his studious prepara- 
 tion before he began work on his final text, which it was his rule to 
 subject to frequent revision before he would publish the result. 
 
 The correspondence of Mr. Lea with public men and scholars 
 at home and abroad ought to throw much light on his intellectual 
 growth and development, and on the influence that he exercised 
 during his long and busy life. His singular modesty, his content- 
 ment in his own library and in his literary work, his absolute indif- 
 ference to public honors or recognition, made all the greater his 
 sacrifice of so much strength and time and labor to public service, 
 to duty as a citizen. All the more is it important that there should 
 be a full and complete memorial to him, showing how he was trained 
 in early youth, developed into a busy man of affairs, active in a great 
 national crisis, earnest in advocating much needed reforms, and 
 crowned by the highest authority as a historical author of the fore- 
 most rank. 
 
 Through all his lifetime of activity there ran a stream of con- 
 stant and wise philanthropy, a steady giving to all good causes, but 
 only after careful inquiry and investigation, and always without 
 ostentation or publicity. Of his personal traits one cannot but 
 recall his kindly gentle nature, his interest and sympathy in all who 
 worked in the same fields — history, public aft'airs, scientific research, 
 philanthropic and educational projects. None of those who were 
 thus associated with him would ever have suspected from his modest 
 bearing that Mr. Lea was a great scholar and historian, whose 
 works received the highest encomiums of great scholars and his- 
 torians at home and abroad. They in turn never heard from him 
 of the manifold public services he had rendered during his busy Hfe. 
 Let us then pay tribute to his many remarkable achievements in all 
 his pursuits. 
 
 There are examples of great historians whose memories have 
 been honored by making their libraries accessible to students. Our 
 American universities have many such libraries brought here and 
 made the shrines for the studious worship of successive generations 
 of scholars. i\'Ir. Carnegie made a gift of the library of Lord Acton 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA. xxxvii 
 
 a special tribute to Lord Morley. Mr. Lea himself provided that 
 his library .should in due course come to the University of Penn- 
 sylvania. In making this provision Mr. Lea was manifestly actuated 
 by the hope that his collection might be of service to future genera- 
 tions of scholars. Such a collection should indeed become the nat- 
 ural centre of the historical work done at the University, whither 
 students might come and find every facility for continuing those 
 researches that made Mr. Lea an example and an encouragement for 
 all who follow his love for the truth. The noblest memorial to a 
 great scholar is to provide for a continuance of his work. 
 
 I trust, therefore, that I may be permitted to hope that the 
 priceless collection, so carefully gathered by Mr. Lea during his 
 long life, should be properly housed so as to make it most fully 
 serviceable, and that amid worthy surroundings its very presence 
 may serve as an example to which the historians of the generations 
 to come might turn for fresh inspiration. 
 
 Henry C. Lea needs no memorial. His achievements constitute 
 his monument, but it is important for our sake and for the sake of 
 the generatioijs to Gome that his memory be kept alive and that the 
 recollection of his active and useful life and of his many-sided 
 labors be kept before us in a manner worthy of the man, the citizen, 
 the historian in whose honor we have gathered tonight. 
 
 The President: 
 
 The portrait of Mr. Henry C. Lea, an admirable copy by Mr. 
 H. H. Breckenridge of Vonnoh's original painting, will be presented 
 to the Society by the representative of the University of Pennsyl- 
 vania, and of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences of 
 Boston, Dr. S. Weir Mitchell, the third of our distinguished Phil- 
 adelphia triumvirate, whose own portraits in print rival in felicity 
 those of the artist on canvas. 
 Dr. S. Weir Mitchell : 
 
 Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Philosophical Society: I 
 have had the honor of being selected by the family and friends of 
 Mr. Henry Charles Lea to. present to the Philosophical Society the 
 portrait of our greatest historian. The portrait I thus place in the 
 custody of the society is a copy of the well-known portrait by 
 Vonnoh, painted fifteen years ago, and is regarded by those who 
 
xxxviii OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS. 
 
 knew Mr. Lea best as an excellent picture of the man as he was. 
 But that responsive face could never be so put on canvas as to 
 recall for me the change from the grave scholarly look of attention 
 to the smile which welcomed a friend to the privilege of a social 
 hour ; alas !— here the artist fails us — ■ 
 
 " For Painting mute and motionless 
 Steals but a glance of time." 
 
 It is not a part of my function to speak at length of the work of 
 my friend, or of his personal character and the qualities which made 
 him both loved and respected. It is probable, however, that no one 
 of those who speak of him this evening has done full justice to a 
 characteristic which he possessed in a degree I have met with in no 
 other man of eminence. The brief contribution I shall here make is 
 a sufficient record of the extraordinary humility of Mr. Lea con- 
 cerning works which scholars regard as among the classics of his 
 time. I hesitated to speak of it because it involved mention of 
 myself and of a service I was so happy as to render my friend, and 
 through him to the art of the historian. 
 
 About the year 1887, when Mr. Lea was haif-way through the 
 first volume of his work on the Inquisition, he broke down in health 
 and consulted me. I was able to give him a schedule of life, to 
 which he adhered with extraordinary fidelity, and with the result 
 at last of being able to resume the task which he had for a time 
 given up. When the first volume of this great work was com- 
 pleted, he sent it to me with a letter. In it he said that he had held 
 back the printing of the introductory pages of his book for a week, 
 because it was his desire to dedicate to me a work which could not 
 have been carried thus far without the health which my counsels 
 had restored to him. He went on to say that he had felt, however, 
 so much doubt as to the reception of this book by scholars, that he 
 finally resolved not to connect my name with what might possibly 
 be considered a failure. 
 
 The letter was perhaps a greater compliment than even the dedi- 
 cation would have been. I think of it with grateful remembrance, 
 and venture to offer it as my contribution to what has been said 
 about one of the most remarkable men with whom I have had the 
 good fortune to be associated in a long life. 
 
ISAAC LEA. 
 
 {Read January 20, 1911.) 
 
 The President, Dr. Keen : 
 
 The portrait of Mr. Isaac Lea, a striking copy of Mr. Uhle's by 
 Mr. Thomas P. Anshutz, of the Academy of the Fine Arts, will be 
 presented by Dr. Samuel G. Dixon, the worthy successor of Mr. 
 Isaac Lea as President of The Academy of Natural Sciences of 
 Philadelphia. 
 
 Dr. Samuel G. Dixon : 
 
 Mr. President, Members of the American Philosophical Society, 
 Honored Representatives of our Mother Country, Ladies and Gen- 
 tlemen: It is my privilege tonight to present to you, on behalf of the 
 family of the late Flenry C. Lea, a portrait of Isaac Lea, LL.D., 
 by LThle, that at last it may rightfully take its place in the series of 
 portraits of distinguished members, which adorn the hall of the 
 Society. 
 
 Isaac Lea's work was ended long ago ; he rests beneath " the low 
 green tent." It may be fitting on this occasion to recall, if only 
 briefly, his work and services to science. 
 
 The honor of membership in this Society has not always an 
 equal significance. In most cases it is bestowed in recognition of 
 large performance in the domain of science or of affairs ; but rarely 
 has a man's work been discounted, and a member admitted for what 
 he was expected to perform. 
 
 Eighty-two years ago this Society elected to its membership a 
 young man whose actual achievement was then .small ; but he was 
 destined to become, in his own special line of research, the most 
 eminent of his generation. 
 
 This young man was Isaac Lea. His life work was the study of 
 fresh-water mollusks. Born in 1792, of parents belonging to the 
 Society of Friends, whose English ancestors had followed Penn to 
 America, young Lea lost his birthright by serving in a volunteer 
 
 xxxix 
 
xl OBITUARY NOTICES OF MEMBERS. 
 
 rifle company towards the end of the War of 1812. About this time 
 he became interested in geology, under the inspiring influence of 
 Professor Vanuxem, whose pioneer work on the geology of New 
 York was soon to begin. Geological horizons are recognized by 
 their fossil shells, and Lea was thus led to study living mollusks, 
 the better to understand those in the rocks. 
 
 The receipt of some fresh-water mussels, sent by ]\Iajor Long, 
 of the U. S. Engineer Corps, then engaged in deepening the Ohio 
 River, was the occasion of Lea's first paper, which was published 
 in the Transactions of this Society for 1827. 
 
 Once attracted to this subject, Lea found an inexhaustible field 
 for work. The great river systems of a continent marvelously pro- 
 lific in bivalve mollusks supplied material. Naturalists in all parts 
 of the country sent the species of their localities. His enthusiasm 
 infected others, and from North and South Amercia, India and 
 Australia, material to be worked up poured in. Lea's work on these 
 great collections of fresh-water mollusks form a series of thirteen 
 stately and richly illustrated quarto volumes, part published by this 
 Society, part by the Academy of Natural Sciences. Llis last paper 
 appeared in 1876. 
 
 Every man who sets himself the task of cultivating one plot in 
 the field of intellectual endeavor must needs resist the voices calling 
 him to other tasks, lest in scattering his force, he fail of high achieve- 
 ment. Lea published but little outside of his special work. Several 
 papers dealing with foreign materials included in gems and other 
 crystals, and one notable paper, on the reptilian tracts of the red 
 sandstones of Pennsylvania, were his main digressions. 
 
 In whatever direction, however, his researches led him he was 
 sure to pursue them to a successful end. The value placed upon 
 them by his fellow scientists is sufficiently indicated by the positions 
 of honor to which they called him. 
 
 I venture upon any estimate of the value of Lea's work with hesi- 
 tation, since my own studies have been in a field widely diverse. I 
 can but give the verdict of those competent to judge, whom I have 
 consulted. Lea's work was mainly descriptive. It was the pioneer 
 work in his branch of zoology, breaking path for those who came 
 after. The march of modern zoology could not proceed without 
 
ISAAC LEA. xli 
 
 such work as his. And it is the honor of this man that his work 
 was well clone. While investigations growing out of Lea's work 
 may prove to have what we term " practical " applications, yet in 
 laying the foundation of our knowledge of freshwater bivalves, Lea's 
 aim and achievement were purely intellectual. Of him may be 
 truthfully quoted those noble words of Tyndall: "The true son of 
 science will pursue his inquiries irrespective of practical considera- 
 tions. He will ever regard the acquisition and expansion of natural 
 knowledge — ^the unravelling of the complex web of nature by the 
 disciplined intellect of man, as his noblest end — and not as a means 
 to any other end." 
 
 The President: 
 
 Dr. Dixon, Dr. Mitchell, Mrs. Henry C. Lea, and other members 
 of Mr. Lea's family, in the name and on behalf of the American 
 Philosophical Society, it gives me great pleasure to accept with 
 sincere thanks these gifts of affection and of a just civic and family 
 pride. They will find in the notable cdlection already in the ancient 
 hall of the American Philosophical Society the portraits of worthy 
 spirits and warm friends from those of Washington, Franklin, Jef- 
 ferson and Rittenhouse down to those of Cope, Leidy and New- 
 comb. There they will ever live, an inspiration to young men of 
 what may be achieved by a long life of faithful unremitting labor, 
 and a reminder to old men of what has been thus splendidly achieved 
 by their predecessors. 
 
PRESENTATION OF PORTRAIT 
 
 OF 
 
 HENRY CHARLES LEA^ 
 
 LATE VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF PENNSYLVANIA 
 
 The Stated Meeting of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania 
 of March 13, 191 1, was largely attended and the transactions 
 were of more than usual interest. A Kfe-size portrait of the late 
 Henry Charles Lea, Vice-President of the Society, painted by Hugh 
 H. Breckenridge, from the original by Robert Vonnoh, was placed 
 at the right of the President's chair. After an address by Edward 
 Raymond Turner, Ph.D., Associate in History at Bryn Mawr 
 College, on "Slavery in Colonial Pennsylvania," the President 
 of the Society, Hon. Samuel W. Pennypacker, LL.D., read the 
 following letter: 
 
 2004 Walnut St., Philadelphia, March 3, 1911. 
 Hon. Samuel W. Pennypacker, President of the Historical Society of 
 Pennsylvania. 
 My dear Sir: 
 
 On behalf of the family of the' late Henry Charles Lea, Vice-President of the 
 Historical Society of Pennsylvania from 1890 till 1909, I have the honor to present 
 a copy by Hugh H. Breckenridge of the portrait of Mr. Lea painted by Robert 
 Vonnoh in 1896. It gives us great pleasure thus to comply with the "suggestion 
 of Colonel William Brooke Rawle, a Vice-President of your Society. 
 
 Sincerely yours, 
 
 Arthur H. Lea. 
 
 Remarks of William Brooke Rawle, Esquire 
 
 Mr. President: I rise to offer a Resolution of Thanks. 
 
 During the eighty-six years and more of our existence as a 
 Society we have had many distinguished men to fill its oflGices 
 of President and Vice-President. Some of them have occupied 
 
 ' Abstract of the Meeting of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, March 
 13, 191 1. Reprinted from The Pennsylvania Magazine, April, 191 1. 
 
xliv PRESENTATION OF PORTRAIT OF 
 
 the most exalted executive, judicial, and legal positions in this 
 Commonwealth; some have been leaders of our Bar; some have 
 held the highest diplomatic positions in foreign countries; some 
 were physicians of great repute; some among them have been men 
 of affairs, men of letters, men of great influence and standing in the 
 community. Among them have been historians and biographers 
 of great and world-wide reputation. The work of these last- 
 mentioned writers, however, for the most part has, naturally, 
 been restricted to the confines of the endeavors of our Society. 
 Their fields of investigation have been chiefly comprised within 
 those geographical limits for work in which our Society was specially 
 formed, that is to say, Pennsylvania, the Middle Colonies, and the 
 war of the American Revolution. Though splendid Work was done 
 by them in their respective fields, none achieved higher honor or 
 distinction than our late lamented Vice-President, whose likeness 
 is portrayed upon the canvas before you. 
 
 Mr. Henry Charles Lea was a many-sided man, and he was 
 eminently successful in everything which he undertook. We, 
 within these walls, however, know him best as the ardent student 
 and delver in the philosophy of history, a worker in the broad 
 fields and deep mines of antiquarian material of an older civilization. 
 
 Mr. Lea's chief field of work, that for which he is known and 
 will be known for all time in Christian lands, was in the history 
 of the religious affairs of the Middle Ages. The crowning literary 
 work of 'his fife was his History of the Inquisition of the Middle 
 Ages, in three volumes, which was translated into German, French, 
 and Itahan, and later his History of the Inquisition of Spain, and 
 The History of the Inquisition in the Spanish Dependencies, making 
 five volumes. These, also, are being translated into foreign lan- 
 guages. Others of his works have gone into second and third 
 editions. The fairness of his opinions and conclusions, the total 
 absence of one-sidedness or of personal and sectarian feehng, 
 and the thoroughness of his work are characteristics which have 
 drawn forth the encomiums of the free minded of different religious 
 convictions almost without exception. 
 
 Mr. Lea became a member of this Society on February 22, 1869. 
 He was elected a Vice-President on May 5, 1890. Upon reaching 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA xlv 
 
 the age of eighty years, when he was endeavoring to rid himself 
 of many of his responsibilities, he requested to be relieved of the 
 office, whereupon he was elected on November 12, 1906, to the 
 position of Honorary Vice-President, and continued to be annually 
 re-elected as such during the remainder of his hfe. 
 
 A few weeks ago, on January 20, 191 1, a remarkable meeting 
 was held in the Hall of the College of Physicians in this city, to do 
 honor to the memory of Mr. Lea. It took place under the auspices 
 of five of our greatest learned institutions — The American Philo- 
 sophical Society, The Library Company of Philadelphia, The 
 University of Pennsylvania, The Academy of Natural Sciences of 
 Philadelphia, and this, The Historical Society of Pennsylvania. 
 It was a notable gathering of men and women of high social, 
 professional, and scientific standing; of prominence and distin- 
 guished rank in learning and Hterary endeavor. Such men as the 
 President of The American Philosophical Society, Dr. Wilh'am W. 
 Keen, the Right Honorable James Bryce, British Ambassador, 
 Dr. Horace Howard Furness, Dr. S. Weir Mitchell, Dr. Joseph G. 
 Rosengarten, and Professor Edward P. Cheyney, joined in appre- 
 ciations of Mr. Lea's character and his great work in its various 
 lines. As has been said of the meeting: "The keynote in all the 
 addresses was one of profound admiration for the unusual com- 
 bination of intellectual and ethical traits which stamped Mr. Lea 
 as one of the truly great men of his generation." 
 
 It is not my intention to give an extended account of Mr. Lea's 
 historical work. This has been done by far abler speakers at the 
 Memorial Meeting which I have mentioned, and will be also by 
 the eloquent gentleman who will follow me. 
 
 As I have remarked, Mr. Lea was a many-sided man. In his 
 early youth he was interested in scientific investigations, and 
 worked and wrote in that fine. Later he became the head of a 
 large pubHshing business, which had been handed down for several 
 generations, from the earhest days of our national existence. In 
 the prime of his middle fife the Northern side in our war of the 
 Rebellion engaged his supreme interest and exertions. He was 
 among the foremost of the patriotic citizens of Philadelphia in 
 the work which resulted in the formation of the Union League, 
 
xlvi PRESENTATION OF PORTRAIT OF 
 
 and he wrote many of the pubhcations issued by it to encourage 
 the patriotic spirit in this city and State which then was the chief 
 object of its existence. He labored earnestly and successfully 
 in the raising and equipment of regiments of troops to be sent to 
 the front; in keeping the ranks full by means of recruiting; in seeing 
 that justice was done in regard to the filling of the quotas of men 
 called for service; and in the payment of the heavy bounties which 
 became necessary therefor. He organized and managed this work 
 so successfully that when, at one time, conscription had to be 
 resorted to, and Philadelphia was called upon to furnish her quota, 
 a surprisingly small number of men — only forty-six it has been 
 stated — had to be secured by such an unpopular method. 
 
 During the anxieties of that terrible war the concentration of 
 patriotic minds on its problems allowed abuses to grow in muni- 
 cipalities, and Philadelphia was no exception. After the restora- 
 tion of peace Mr. Lea threw himself vigorously into the work of 
 reform, and contributed of his intellectual powers, his purse, and his 
 time, with zeal and energy; indeed, he was the chief of the leaders 
 in that crusade against corruption, extravagance, and political 
 criminality. I saw him frequently in those days, for I was in the 
 law offices of the late Wilham Henry Rawle, who was the counsel 
 for the Municipal Reform Association, which led and fought the 
 fight with considerable, though not very lasting, success. Mr. Lea 
 was a frequent, and at times a daily visitor to our offices for con- 
 sultation, advice, and assistance, and I can testify to the good and 
 hard work he then did himself and in making others do hkewise. 
 
 Philadelphia has had for many years the reputation outside 
 of being among men the most hospitable place in this country. 
 This came about from the fact that ever since the winter of 1799- 
 1800 there has been among us a social coterie of a high intel- 
 lectual stamp, beginning with the informal weekly gatherings of 
 congenial members of The American Philosophical Society at the 
 residence of Dr. Caspar Wistar, the President of that time-honored 
 institution. After Dr. Wistar's death these gatherings, under the 
 name of the Wistar Party, continued until the early days of the 
 war of the Rebellion, when partisan feeUng became so strong, 
 and opinions on the great issues at stake so diverse, as to cause 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA xlvii 
 
 the breaking of friendships and social and often home ties, the 
 consequence being that the gatherings fell off and then ceased 
 for awhile, their place being taken by other social coteries, none of 
 them of long duration. When the time was opportune a resuscita- 
 tion of the Wistar Party took place, and Mr. Lea's father. Dr. 
 Isaac Lea, resigned his ofhce of Dean, or President, and Mr. Lea 
 himself was elected to succeed him. For sixty-seven years father 
 and son held the position of Dean, the chiefs around whom and their 
 associates gathered, on Saturday evenings at stated periods during 
 the winter season, much of the intellectual, professional, scientific, 
 and cultured society in our community, as well as the distinguished 
 travellers, men of letters and learning, and other worthy celebrities 
 who visited our city. Mr. Lea's interest and zeal in the Associa- 
 tion were great and constant, as in all his pursuits in life. 
 
 There were many other fields of Mr. Lea's work, and it is a 
 pleasure to know that a full and adequate Memoir of him is likely 
 to be given to the world in the not distant future. 
 
 Mr. Lea was a man of profound learning; a master of several 
 modern languages and a fine classical scholar; a careful and thor- 
 ough student; an ardent lover of accuracy, truth, and justice; a 
 man possessing enormous capacity for work, and systematic in 
 doing it most thoroughly; an exhaustive investigator of original 
 sources of knowledge from their very foundations; a man of infinite 
 pains in all he undertook, whose style of writing was most concise 
 and apposite, with no unnecessary circumlocution or departure 
 from the point. He was just and fair in weighing his evidence 
 and in arriving at conclusions and deductions, in which he was 
 always without bias of any sort, religious or otherwise. 
 
 A marked characteristic of Mr. Lea's thoroughness of character 
 and in his work is shown iri the fact that, believing that a book 
 without an index lost full half its value, and with a bad one almost 
 as much, he indexed his own volumes in the most complete and 
 concise manner, not counting the laboriousness, the tediousness, 
 and the drudgery of the undertaking. He held that the author 
 alone could properly index a book. 
 
 He was exceedingly liberal in contributing from his extensive 
 means to worthy objects, and his pecuniary assistance in the erec- 
 
xlviii PRESENTATION OF PORTRAIT OF 
 
 tion of this building in which we are gathered was a great help to 
 us in our hard struggle for the accomplishment of that object. 
 
 We are fortunate in having upon our walls in this building 
 many valuable portraits of distinguished men. We have a complete 
 collection of the portraits of our Presidents and of some of our 
 Vice-Presidents, and it is a great pleasure that this excellent one 
 of Mr. Lea is added to our collection. 
 
 I move you, Mr. President: 
 
 That the thanks of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania be 
 most cordially extended to the members of the family of Mr. Henry 
 Charles Lea, our late Vice-President, for their kindness and gen- 
 erosity in presenting to the Society this beautiful and hfe-like 
 portrait of him, copied by Hugh H. Breckenridge, after Vonnoh's 
 painting, which will recall to our minds, and hand down to those 
 who come after us, the features and resemblance of our distinguished 
 associate and liberal benefactor, who has added so much to the 
 honor and high standing of our Society. 
 
 Remarks of Hon. Hampton L. Carson 
 
 Mr. President: I rise to second the resolutions offered by Mr. 
 Brooke Rawle. My recollections of Mr. Lea make it an agreeable 
 duty; my relations to him and to his family make it a personal 
 pleasure. I often observed him in conference or discussion with 
 men of affairs about matters of moment. I often met him on the 
 street and had famihar chats about men and current events. I 
 listened, alas too rarely, to his conversation about books, pictures, 
 and other things which interested him as a scholar and as a collector. 
 He had a penetrating mental eye which saw far into the heart 
 of things, while at the same time he had a breadth of vision which 
 saved him from narrowness or near-sightedness. He was never 
 dogmatic, although he was always persistent in the maintenance 
 of his opinions, and if challenged or annoyed by opposition which 
 seemed unreasonable, he could cite facts which became over- 
 whelming, not simply in numbers, but because of the manner in 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA xlix 
 
 which they were marshalled by a master commander of what the 
 world had learned by experience. His mind was a microscope 
 and a telescope combined, if the law of optics will permit of such 
 an illustration. He knew and saw the smallest details, and he 
 could draw their most distant relationships into combinations 
 so as to present a result which was impressive because of the light 
 it shed on the meaning of customs, formularies, and conventions 
 which formed the organic structure of society in past ages. 
 
 It is easy enough to say that Mr. Lea was a very learned man, 
 and to point to the titles of his books and to the character of the 
 authorities cited in the foot-notes, to prove that his researches 
 were recondite, but after all that is very general, very vague, 
 and quite unsatisfactory, because it conveys no definite idea of 
 the quality or the value of his learning. We must go far deeper 
 than that. We must examine his text, and then examine his 
 authorities, and then go back to the text to ascertain what use 
 he made of his raw material, how he assimilated and arranged it, 
 and how he evolved a statement of the principle underlying his 
 deductions. In that way we can secure an appreciative estimate 
 of the illuminating character of his scholarship. An analysis of 
 his mental processes will, I think, give these results. First, he 
 collected his facts, his phenomena, his symptoms, and in doing 
 that he discarded all theories and rejected all secondary sources 
 of information. He was unwilling to trust to translations, but 
 studied documents in their native tongues, whether Welsh, Anglo- 
 Saxon, Ancient Irish, or Icelandic, whether Prankish, Gothic, 
 Spanish, or Itahan. Next, he made exact and careful notes of his 
 observations, and in these there was not the slightest trace of a 
 dogma or a theory. Then, having exhausted the entire field of 
 original research, and searched every crack and cranny and crevice 
 of hidden or forgotten lore, no matter what their latitude or longi- 
 tude in history, he brought his notes together. Having prepared 
 himself by laborious analysis for the far greater work of synthesis, 
 in mechanical phrase, he assembled his parts and fitted them into 
 each other, marking their similarities and observing their differ- 
 ences. Thus he prepared his mind for the consideration of their 
 general significance, their striking adaptability. Then, with a 
 
1 PRESENTATION OP PORTRAIT OF 
 
 divination peculiarly his own, which gave him the clue to the 
 arrangement of multiform and widely scattered parts, he pieced 
 out the puzzle in a compact and shapely structure, which as it 
 grew under his hands gave out flashes of meaning to his cool and 
 cautious brain until, finally, the arrangement being complete, 
 he was ready to expound the meaning of his work in a striking, 
 neat, and precise statement of a philosophic principle, so simple 
 and yet at the same time so convincing as to carry to the mind 
 of the reader of his books the assurance that the author had found 
 the key that unlocked the mystery and thrown open to public 
 entrance all the chambers of the Enchanted Castle of Knowledge. 
 
 To change the simile, it occurs to me that Dr. Lea did in the field 
 of history, both legal and sacerdotal, what the bacteriologist does 
 at the present time in the science of biology or of medicine. He 
 studied germs, isolated them, ascertained their exact character, 
 observed their effect upon the body politic, and then announced 
 the law of their operation. He used the microscope when his mind 
 was engaged in analysis. He made blood tests when he general- 
 ized, and he operated on the lower animals in experimentation, 
 if I may so describe previous conditions of our ancestors without 
 causing commotion, and then announced the law of social life 
 or the cause of a particular political disease. 
 
 We can test his mental process very readily. Take, for instance, 
 the first book that he wrote, Superstition and Force. It is that part 
 of his labors which appeals most strongly to me, because it is an 
 attempt, and a most successful one, to explain the origin of certain 
 mysterious passages in the law of procedure and proof, which up 
 to the time that he wrote had been a sealed book even to philo- 
 sophic jurists. It consists of four essays, "The Wager of Law," 
 "The Wager of Battle," "The Ordeal," and "Torture." If we 
 examine his footnotes, we find that he has not confined himself, 
 as many men would have done, to an Anglo-Saxon examination 
 to explain the law of England, but he has gone to the Sagas of 
 Iceland, to Scandinavia, to Gothic and Early Frankish estab- 
 lishments. He is as famihar with the decrees of Clovis and the 
 capitularies of Childebert and Charlemagne as he is with the later 
 statutes of Henry II and III. Although not a lawyer he has an 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA li 
 
 accurate understanding of Glanville, Bracton, and Fleta, three 
 authors whose names are frequently on the hps of lawyers who have 
 never opened the Hds of the volumes. With an intuitive sense 
 which can be described as a flashlight of the mind, he reveals the 
 contents of the darkest recesses of history, and causes ordinary 
 objects to stand out in such clear and scientific relation to each 
 other that we find the evolution of the system delineated as happily 
 and as easily to be comprehended as the chapter of Blackstone 
 on the Action of Debt. 
 
 He appKed the same methods of workmanship to his other 
 books. In the preface to his History of the Inquisition of the Middle 
 Ages he wrote that at the commencement of his historical studies 
 he speedily became convinced that the surest basis of investigation 
 of a given period lay in an examination of its jurisprudence, which 
 presents without disguise its aspirations and the means regarded 
 as best adapted for their realization. Clearly he was right, for we 
 may talk about kings and conquerors, and their names serve but 
 as shibboleths, while much of what they did or said has vanished, 
 but in a statute, a crystallization of custom, a statement of what 
 the sovereign power had once willed to be law, there dwells a per- 
 manent preservation of a vanished state of society. Just as fossil 
 bones found in the drifts of hills will enable the geologists to set 
 the date of an era^ so will a law enable the historian to depict 
 the character of those who peopled the world at that particular 
 time. Mr. Lea wrote and toiled in the spirit of that noble sentence 
 of Lord Bacon in his essay on "The Advancement of Learning:" 
 "Antiquities or remnants of history are 'tanquam tabula naufragii' 
 (Hke the log of a shipwrecked vessel), when industrious persons" 
 — mark these adjectives of Lord Bacon, and see how fitly they 
 describe the methods of Mr. Lea's work — "when industrious 
 persons, by an exact and scrupulous diligence and observation, 
 out of monuments, names, words, proverbs, traditions, private 
 records and evidences, passages of books that concern not story, 
 and the like, do save and recover somewhat from the deluge of 
 time." His work will always be regarded as original. I do not 
 mean original in the sense that he created or invented, but original 
 in the sense that hereafter there will be no necessity for any in- 
 
lii PRESENTATION OF PORTRAIT OF 
 
 vestigator, unless charged with some special inquiry, to find occa- 
 sion to examine the actual manuscripts. He has done that work 
 and done it for all time. We may talk of the monumental work 
 of Gibbon, stretching over a thousand years, or of Robertson, 
 the first of philosophic historians, or of the charms of Motley 
 and of Prescott, but we find in Lea the midribs and the spine 
 which constitute the framework upon which European institutiogs 
 have developed and shaped themselves ; we have them there defined 
 in such a manner as to enable the thoughtful student to realize 
 the force of the law of evolution, the development and the applica- 
 tion of which Mr. Lea has made so clear. 
 
 I do not know how it is that we fail in our day and generation 
 to see the greatness of men while they are still among us; perhaps 
 it is because we are too close to them. We can place our eyes 
 so close beneath the dome of the Capitol at Washington as to be 
 unable to see anything except a mass of white marble. It is only 
 when in perspective that it can be seen piercing the heavens and 
 crowning the great structure which enshrines the institutions 
 which shelter us and are to shelter our posterity. So it is that as 
 the years recede Mr. Lea's monumental work will be appreciated, 
 rising higher and higher and still higher above the labors of his 
 contemporaries. Here in our midst was a Philadelphian, one of 
 our own Vice-Presidents, who has rendered this Society a service 
 and conferred upon this community an honor which no words 
 of mine can fitly express. 
 
 Acceptance oe the Portrait by the President, 
 Honorable Samuel W. Pennypacker 
 
 Mr. Lea's fondness for Hterature and earnestness in investigation 
 came to him with his pedigree. His father had studied and had 
 published many scientific works. His grandfather, Mathew Carey, 
 published The Museum in thirteen volumes, a collection of State 
 papers and contemporary literature, and wrote many essays upon 
 poHtical and historical subjects. It is an interesting fact, worthy 
 to have attention upon an occasion of this kind, that years before 
 
HENRY CHARLES LEA UJi 
 
 the organization of this Society Mathew Carey urged the forma- 
 tion of a State historical association. Mr. Lea's intellectual ac- 
 tivities were very varied, but he was essentially an historian. It 
 cannot be said that his works were popular. It may be that even 
 a large proportion of this select audience have never read them, 
 but popularity and the appreciation or lack of appreciation of such 
 as you and I form a very inadequate test of merit. There are many 
 popular writers who simply take the thoughts and the facts which 
 have been presented time and again before them, and write them 
 over, and their popularity only lasts until some one comes along 
 to repeat the same process. Mr. Lea selected a subject about 
 which before him men were not informed. He studied it with 
 the utmost care, he presented it with all the charm of literary 
 skill, and perhaps no other Philadelphian, perhaps no other Ameri- 
 can historian, will be so long remembered among scholars and men 
 of learning whose judgment is of value. He was for many years 
 the senior Vice-President of this Society, and he made the most 
 substantial individual contribution toward the erection of this' 
 hall. It is, therefore, eminently fitting that upon these walls 
 should hang his portrait. I accept, on behalf of this Society the 
 portrait so generously presented, and I assure the donors that it 
 will be carefully preserved and tenderly cherished. 
 
 The Resolution offered by Mr. Brooke Rawle was unanimously 
 adopted.