) 16 
 
 [ 
 
 3 
 
 \ 
 
 F6 
 
 'Opy 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 Columbia Unitoerfi^ttp 
 
 in ttje Citp of JI3etti gotk 
 
 DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY 
 
 THE HISTORICAL ESSAY 
 
 and , 
 
 THE CRITICAL REVIEW 
 
 Some suggestions as to their preparation, 
 
 with examples taken from 
 
 American history 
 
 B:y 
 
 DIXON RYAN FOX, Ph.D. 
 
 Assistant Professor of History 
 
 Columbia University 
 
 New York City 
 
These directions were originally intended for home 
 students, but those working in residence at the Univer- 
 sity can, it is thought, find something of value in them. 
 
 ©CIA6 5G581 
 
 Copyright 1921, University Extension, Columbia University, New York, N. Y. 
 
 FEB -4 1922 
 
^ 
 
 \^ 
 
 The Historical Essay 
 
 C ^ 
 
 He toiled in the archives, hunting the little fact that makes the difference. 
 
 — Professor Maitland writing of Lord Acton. 
 
 An historical essay of from twenty-five hundred to six thousand words 
 upon some topic selected from within a certain period or field of American 
 history will be required of the student as a part of the term's work. It is 
 to be based upon serious, systematic and extended investigation, and its 
 preparation constitutes not only the most important exercise of this course 
 of study but one of the most valuable experiences in the student's entire 
 education. The method presently to be outlined is in general the method 
 by which a lawyer prepares a brief, a minister a sermon or an author a 
 book; an engineer, an advertising agent or a business expert working out 
 a memorandum for his clients would, in part, follow a similar procedure. 
 As one sets out upon this enterprise, therefore, it should be understood 
 that here may be acquired a technique of inquiry which will be serviceable 
 wherever one essays to learn the substantial truth of any matter, and a 
 technique which the world will value and will even pay for. But most 
 important is the understanding thus developed that the whole truth is not 
 contained in any texbook or in any single work though it reach to several 
 volumes. The reader finds the use and opportunity of a library, with its 
 indexes, encyclopedias and bibliographic aids; he learns how to pick out 
 from each book, pamphlet, report or newspaper the few small parts which 
 bear upon his subjects; he develops the power to judge between conflicting 
 statements and to compare the credibility of different sources. The self- 
 respect that comes from thoroughness will in the end be his. 
 
 At the proper time and after due reflection on the course as far as he 
 has covered it, each student is asked to express his preference for a par- 
 ticular subject,^ submitting several titles as suggestions, but definite as- 
 signment is obtained by individual arrangement with the instructor. As 
 soon as the student receives his assignment he will make a list of all the 
 major works upon the subject. By consulting the card catalogue of as 
 many libraries as are available he will ascertain what books are entered 
 under his title, though it is unlikely that he will, by this means alone, be 
 able to prepare a very long list, or learn much about the relative value of 
 books. Similarly he will consult Channing, Hart and Turner's Guide to 
 the Study and Reading of American History, an excellent manual with 
 references to general and special works; C. K. Adams' Manual of Histor- 
 
 1 Before selecting a subject please inform the instructor as to your library 
 facilities. How near are you to a public library or other considerable collection 
 of books? Has the library the principal standard works on American history? 
 A set of the Congressional Debates, etc.? Any newspaper files? Any special 
 collections of interest to the historian? Make yourself a force in your community 
 for the maintenance of a good library. 
 
 [1] 
 
leal Literature : the American Library Association's Literature of Amer- 
 ican History, with its supplement, which arranges works by periods and 
 contains critical estimates of those mentioned; the Book Review Digest 
 and the Cumulative Index; and the bibliographical essays at the end of 
 each volume of the American Nation Series, the desired volume being 
 found, if necessary, by consulting the general index under the topic 
 studied. By using the index the student will receive much help from 
 T. L. Bradford's Bihliographer's Manual of American History (5 volumes, 
 revision of 1910), and, if he is patient and persistent, from Joseph 
 Sabin's Dictionary of Books relating to America. The elaborate 
 bibliographies in Justin Winsor's Narrative and Critical His- 
 tory of America are useful for the earlier part of American 
 history, especially in their references to available source material; the 
 Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VII, pp. 753-834, contains book lists for 
 the periods of United States history, although unfortunately it includes 
 no descriptive comment; the bibliographies at the end of each chapter in 
 Bassett's Short History of the United States, Max Farrand's Development 
 of the United States, the Riverside History of the United States, etc., refer 
 to many modern special treatises. Poole's Index, the Reader's Guide to 
 Periodical Literature, and the Annual Library Index are useful for 
 articles in periodicals; the bibliographies at the end of articles in the en- 
 cyclopedias will often help, especially if one consults the general index 
 for related topics. Appleton's and the National Cyclopedia op American 
 Biography, under the names of the principal persons important in rela- 
 tion to the subject, will suggest some titles, while McLaughlin and Hart's 
 Cyclopedia of American Government and Lalor's Cyclopedia of Political 
 Science, will be of service. For material published since 1902, the student 
 should consult the Writings of American History edited by G. C. GrifBn 
 and others. A. P. C. GrifRn has compiled a Bibliography of American His- 
 torical Societies and an Index of Articles upon American Local History. 
 This array of bibliographical titles may seem sufficiently formidable, but 
 if a student has access to one of the larger libraries, the curator will sug- 
 gest other aids, for example in the use of public documents. Although, 
 other things being equal, the more books available, the better the essay, 
 no one should feel disheartened if not all the facilities here suggested can 
 be obtained. The standard works like those of McMaster, Von Hoist, Os- 
 good, Schouler, Channing, Adams, Rhodes, Hildreth, The American Nation 
 Se7-ies, etc., are usually to be had and generally a respectable number of 
 biographies and special topical studies. 
 
 By all these aids the student will be enabled to gather a large number 
 of titles of books dealing in whole or in part with his subject — perhaps 
 thirty or forty. Each such title should be entered clearly in ink upon a 
 separate card, together with the name of the author, the place and date 
 of publication, a comment based upon a bibliographer's estimate (if any 
 is found in some of the works mentioned above), upon some review ap- 
 pearing soon after the book's publication, or upon the student's own 
 examination of the book, and some indication of the portion of it 
 dealing directly with his subject. 
 
 [2J 
 
Supposing, for example, that the student has chosen the "Missouri Com- 
 promise" as his subject, one of his cards will appear as follows: 
 
 Lucien Carr, 
 
 Missouri: a Bone of Contention [American Commonwealth 
 Series] (Boston, 1899), chapters vii-ix. 
 
 50 pages devoted to subject, generally in a judicial style, 
 though apparently somewhat resentful of anti-slavery inter- 
 ference. 
 
 The cards are noio to be submitted to the instructor- for his examination 
 and advice, a part of the titles possibly being set aside as negligible, under 
 the circumstances, a part indicated indispensable and a part recom- 
 mended to be used as supplementary, if time admits. It may be that 
 some books that have not been mentioned will occur to the instructor 
 and he will suggest that these be sought. 
 
 The student should now read through the account recommended for 
 the purpose, to get a broad view of the subject, and then prepare an outline 
 according to the treatment which, in the light of his preliminary infor- 
 mation, seems to be best. The following, by no means recommended as 
 perfect or complete, is offered merely as a simple suggestion as to pro- 
 cedure : 
 
 I. Historical Background. 
 
 1. Early settlement and development of Missouri. 
 
 a. Origin of population. 
 
 b. Number and distribution. 
 
 2. Slavery in Missouri Territory. 
 
 a. Extent of slavery. Geographical basis of plantation economy. 
 b Territorial law on slavery. 
 
 3. Application for admission as a state. 
 
 [3] 
 
II. Missouri question in 15th Congress. 
 
 1. Balanced condition of the Union. 
 
 2. Changing southern view of slavery 
 
 3. Tallmadge's amendment. 
 
 a. Influences supporting. 
 
 b. Arguments for. Moral. Constitutional. 
 
 c. Influences opposing. 
 
 d. Arguments against. Moral. Constitutional (e. g., provision in Louisi- 
 ana treaty of equality of new states with old). 
 
 4. Fate of Tallmadge s amendment. 
 
 5. Public sentiment in the various sections. 
 
 III. Missouri Question in 16th Congress. 
 
 1. Differences in proportional strength of sections. 
 
 2. Application of Maine. 
 
 a. Relation to Massachusetts. 
 
 3. Proposal to join the two bills. 
 
 a. Roberts' amendment. 
 
 i. Discussion on the merits of slavery. Pinkney vs. King. 
 
 b. Burrill s amendment. 
 
 c. Thomas' amendment. 
 
 d. The committee of conference. 
 
 4. The Compromise of 1820. 
 
 a. Final debate and comment. John Randolph and the Compromise. 
 
 b. The bill passed. 
 
 IV. After the First Compromise. 
 
 1. Popular response. 
 
 a.. Comment of individuals and press in different sections. 
 b. Apparent effect upon the anti-slavery movement. 
 
 2. The constitutional convention in Missouri. 
 
 a. Expression of delegates' opinion on the compromise. 
 
 b. Treatment of the free-negro question. 
 
 3. Congressional specification as to free-negro question (called "The Second 
 Missouri Compromise"). 
 
 a. Constitutionality of this procedure. 
 
 b. Action of Missouri. 
 
 4. The electoral count (a third compromise), 
 a. Opinion as to its propriety. 
 
 V. Effect of the Compromise. 
 
 1. Supposed finality. 
 
 2. New questions. 
 
 3. Discontent of south. 
 
 4. Violation of the compromise. 
 
 With his outline before him the student now begins to take notes. 
 Ihese should be written neatly, in ink, on one side of papers (which are 
 much cheaper than cards) preferably about 5V2 in. x S% in., running 
 lengthwise of the page, liberal margins being left at the sides, and an 
 entry being made at the top of each paper as to particular sub-topic de- 
 veloped dy the notes on that sheet, and book and page references for each 
 item put in the margin. Each }mper, then, is like a pigeon-hole into 
 which is placed all the matter coming under one sub-head of the outline, 
 as it is gleaned from different sources. In a more extensive essay it would 
 doubtless be advantageous to give a separate sheet of paper for each note, 
 properly labelling each, of course, according to the outline scheme, but in 
 a work of the size here contemplated probably the be.st method is to read 
 through one account at a time distributing the items of fact or comment 
 
 [4] 
 
each to its appropriate paper, modifying the outline — possibly to the ex- 
 tent of complete rearrangement — and consequently his note-sheets, as ex- 
 perience may suggest. 
 
 For example, on beginning the narrative of the compromise in Carr's 
 Missouri, the reader finds an account of the number of free and slave 
 states immediately before 1820. He, of course, puts this on his paper 
 marked "Balanced condition of the Union"; (if his outline did not happen 
 to contain this sub-topic, he would now supply the omission). This paper 
 would then look something like this: 
 
 Balanced condition of the Union 
 
 Carr Mississippi's admission, 1817, made 10 slave and 10 
 
 Missouri free. 111., Dec. 1818; Ala., Dec. 1819; balance kept 
 
 p. 139 without stipulations imposed. Mo. applies for admis- 
 
 sion (as slave state). 
 
 If in some other book there is found something more upon the "Balanced 
 condition of the Union", it will naturally be recorded, with its reference 
 citation, on this same paper. If there are a number of notes on this sub- 
 topic another paper similarly headed will be used. On page 142 of Carr's 
 book there is a discussion of arguments against the Tallmadge amend- 
 ment; on page 143, arguments in favor; on page 147, observations on viola- 
 tion of the compromise. All these will be recorded on their appropriate 
 papers, the notes on these sub-topics to be supplemented from other books. 
 Sometimes an extract, especially a quotation from a contemporary, is 
 better directly transcribed in full than abstracted. 
 At the end a single paper may look thus: 
 
 [5] 
 
John Randolph and the Ooini)romise. 
 
 McMaster, Wlien in com. of conference 18 northerners changed to 
 
 Vol. V vote vs. restriction, R. calls them "dough-faces", a 
 
 p. 591 name used for 40 yrs. to denote northern men with 
 
 southern principles. 
 
 Morning after compromise passed R. moved recon- 
 sideration while bill still in Speaker Clay s hands. 
 Declared out of order while morning s business un- 
 settled. Clay, alarmed, sent bill post-haste to Senate 
 and said no jurisdiction. 
 
 Annals of 
 
 Congrc;<s 
 1819-1821 
 pp. 1588- 
 1590 
 
 Hildreth, 
 VI. 691 
 et seq. 
 
 H. Adams 
 Randolph. 
 pp. 272- 
 274 
 
 R. never forgave Clay for this trickery. 
 
 J. Q. Adams 
 
 Memoirs, 
 
 V, 4. 
 
 same, V. 277 "Floyd and Randolph were for bringing Missouri into 
 the Union by storm, by bullying a majority into a 
 minority." 
 
 R. calls com)), a "dirty bargain '. 
 
 R. though claiming to detest slavery believed in self- 
 determination for states and hated Clay who bent all 
 to nationalism. (See notes on Clay.) 
 
 Sometimes the student will find he has put an item under a heading less 
 appropriate than some other; by the use of scissors, pins and paste-pot 
 he may easily transfer it to its proper place. After all this work has 
 been done, he will arrange his papers in the order he intends to follow 
 in writing, and subrait the notes to the instructor for criticism. 
 
 When the notes are returned the student has before him the material 
 for his essay, and it will not be found difficult to write when he so obvious- 
 ly has something to say. But to write well is nearly always difficult. In 
 general, it will be agreed, the essay should stick to facts; it should be 
 based upon the notes. However, the writer should make his facts his 
 own, relate them one to another through his understanding of the ten- 
 dencies at work in thoi^e times whose story he is telling, and should write 
 his narrative with the spirit and coherence of his own style. Of course, 
 it may occasionally be advisable to use the exact Avords of a book or 
 article, in which case quotation marks should indicate the precise extent 
 of the direct quotation. Taking for data our notes on "John Randolph 
 and the Constitution", we may imagine ourselves constructing a narrative 
 something like this: 
 
 [6] 
 
This first great legislative battle in the contest for the western 
 territories had revealed the character of the warring forces and 
 their leaders. Those with Rufus King stood firmly for free soil 
 in all the future states ; those with Pinkney crusaded for the gen- 
 eral spread of slavery as a blessing; John Randolph, while claim- 
 ing to detest that institution, maintained the right of self determi- 
 nation and control for every state as guaranteed by the Constitu- 
 tion ; Henry Clay presented an ideal which he claimed worth the 
 sacrifice of all these principles, the solidarity of the nation achieved 
 through compromise, and apparently he had prevailed/ Ran- 
 dolph, in particular, hated Clay and this unjust exaltation of the 
 nation at the cost of states." Those northerners who were con- 
 verted by this compromiser's arguments he stigmatized as "dough 
 faces", a name of derision and contempt which for forty years 
 was fastened upon "northern men with southern principles".^ It 
 was a "dirty bargain" that these nationalists had made,* and 
 should be. reconsidered before it was too late. 
 
 On the morning following the final vote, while the bill lay on 
 the Speaker's desk unsigned, Randolph rose and desired to move 
 this reconsideration so that all restrictions might be stricken from 
 it. In alarm Clay ruled him out of order and declared that the 
 morning's business as set down upon the calendar must be consid- 
 ered first. But, in the course of this routine, while Randolph 
 waited for his opportunity, the Speaker signed and sent the bill 
 post-haste to the Senate. When at last the cjuestion came, he 
 answered that the matter was no longer within the jurisdiction of 
 the House. '^ This sharp practice John Randolph could never for- 
 get or forgive.'' It had finally frustrated his plan to bring Mis- 
 souri in by storm regardless of all opposition.'^ 
 
 1 Supra, pp. 14, 17, 18. Cf. C. Schurz, op.cit. pp. 172-182. 
 
 ■2. Henry Adams, John Randolph, pp. 272-274. 
 
 3 J. B. McMaster, History of the People of the United States, Vol. V, p. 591. 
 
 4 Richard Hildreth, History of the United States, Vol. pp. 691 et seq. 
 
 5 A7inals of Congress, 1819-1821, pp. 1588-1590. 
 <i J. Q. Adams, Memoirs, Vol. V, p. 4. 
 
 7 Ihid., Vol. V, p. 277. The comment is in Adams' acrid humor: "Floyd 
 and Randolph were for bringing Missouri into the Union by storm, by bully- 
 ing a majority into a minority". 
 
 (20) 
 _ 
 
lu this sample of narrative it will be noticed that the second sentence 
 refers to matters which we suppose to have been developed earlier in the 
 paper, say on pages 14, 17 and 18; consequently we refer to those pages as 
 "above", using, according to custom, the Latin word supra, which because 
 it is from a foreign language is Italicized; if we were asking the reader 
 to compare this statement with something to be found later, on page 24. 
 we would use the word i7ifra. It seems well also to refer the reader to 
 Carl Schurz's Henry Clay where that statesman's views on nationalism are 
 more fully developed. Inasmuch as we desire, or at least suggest to the 
 reader to compare what is here said with what Schurz says, we write c/., 
 which stands for the Latin word confer, meaning compare. But it is sup- 
 posed that previously in the paper there have been references 
 to this work, so that we say op. cit., which is the abbreviation of opere 
 citate, or "in the work cited". When, however the citation is to the same 
 work as immediately before on the same page, as is the case in note seven, 
 we use the expression ibid., which is an abbreviation for the Latin word 
 ihidem meaning "in the same place". In our reference to Hildreth we 
 cite Page 691 and those immediately following as et seq., which stands 
 for et sequentes, having that significance. If we referred to material 
 scattered through a book, we would write after the title the word passim, 
 a verb form meaning "scattered about". When we mention for a second 
 time an article found in a reference book or some other collection, we 
 may give the name of the particular author and the general work 
 and then write loc. cit., for loco citato, "in the place cited". Errors in 
 spelling or obvious absurd mistakes in the source or author quoted should 
 be transcribed if you make a direct quotation, though immediately fol- 
 lowed by the Latin word sic in parenthesis indicating that the original 
 is "thus". At first it may appear that such devices are pedantic and 
 that English words would do quite as well, but they are the standard 
 expressions of scholarship and any departure from them would probably 
 make for confusion rather than clearness. 
 
 But, it will be asked, why have footnotes at all? Do they not destroy 
 the symmetry of the page, distract attention from the body of the narra- 
 tive, and give the reader an uncomfortable feeling that the author takes 
 the opportunity to display his erudition? Certainly these questions de- 
 serve a patient answer, for footnotes are not mere irritating nuisances 
 tolerated by reason of tradition, nor are they generally set forth to grati- 
 fy the writer's vanity. In the first place, in the footnotes may be given 
 direct quotations or other information or critical statements which for 
 some reason do not seem to fit well into the text, as is illustrated in our 
 footnote seven. Secondly, they furnish bibliographical aid to the reader; 
 if anything in the text so arouses his interest that he would seek more 
 knowledge on that matter, the corresponding note, in pointing out the 
 source on which the stated fact or judgment has been based, suggests 
 that there, perhaps, may be found more information of a similar kind. 
 As H. H. Bancroft once remarked, writing on this subject in his Literary 
 Industries, "The historian should leave the ladder by which he has 
 climbed". Thirdly, the self-imposed obligation to cite his authorities pro- 
 
 [8] 
 
vides an excellent discipline for the writer himself, saving him very prob- 
 ably from hasty generalizations and statements that he could not prove. 
 Blaine's Tioenty Years of Congress is a work of considerable value, but 
 must be read with constant caution because of the author's carelessness as 
 to particular facts and summary judgments. "If Blaine", observes the 
 historian Rhodes^ "had felt the necessity of giving authorities in a foot- 
 note for every statement about which there might have been a question, he 
 certainly would have written an entirely different sort of a book." 
 
 The footnotes, too, enable the well informed reader more intelligently 
 to judge the credibility of the narrative. If the citation is to a notoriously 
 unreliable authority, the statement will be taken as tinged with the 
 partisanship or other inaccuracy which is known to characterize the orig- 
 inal. The opportunities which the author cited has enjoyed as to gaining 
 knowledge of the event, of course make his testimony more or less valu- 
 able as the case may be. This introduces the very important question 
 as to what are sources in history and how they may differ in value. 
 
 A primary or original source is the record or testimony of one who had 
 personal knowledge of the event, person, place or object described; or it 
 may be an object itself which has been made by man, such as a pyramid 
 in Egypt, or which has conditioned man's effort, such as the battle-field of 
 Gettysburg. We are, of course, chiefly dependent on written testimony. 
 An original source is the work of a contemporary, though that in itself 
 is not enough, e.g., the testimony of DeWitt Clinton who was governor of 
 New York in 1820 would not be a good source on the transactions of the 
 conference committee on the Missouri Compromise in Washington, though 
 it might have great value as a source on the state of public opinion in 
 New York on the compromise. We must remember that in one sentence 
 or paragraph a writing may be an original source and in another sen- 
 tence on the same page not an original source. On our specimen page two 
 original sources are cited. The Aniials of Congress are made up of steno- 
 graphic reports taken on the spot and constitute what is probably a reli- 
 able record, as far as it goes, of what Randolph and Clay said and did in 
 the Senate on Tuesday, March 2, 1820. John Quincy Adams as Secretary 
 of State was closely in touch with affairs, and he might be expected to 
 know the opinions of Randolph; later in association with Clay he, too, had 
 to feel the lash of Randolph's tongue. His observations were jotted down 
 each night #ith slight revision, and hence have much greater value than 
 would reminiscences written by a man in old age, when his recollection 
 would be vague and pieced out by recourse to historical material as avail- 
 able for the historian today as it was for him. However, Adams was a man 
 of strong prejudices and it would be better if we had more testimony on 
 these points to add to his; indeed, a historical fact can hardly be said to be 
 established until we have an agreement of at least two competent wit- 
 nesses. It is obvious, also, that were Adams always cool and judicial he 
 would yet not be the very best authority on Randolph's opinion. Would it 
 not be more satisfactory if in the manscript letters of Randolph, such as 
 
 1 American Historical Association Report, 1900, Vol. I, p. 56. 
 
 [9] 
 
those preserved in the Library of Congress, we might find his own state- 
 ment on this matter? Even then it would affect its reliability if it were 
 made to a sympathetic friend like Governor Nicholson or to some con- 
 stituent, personally unknown, who had solicited a statement, or if it were 
 made the morning befoi-e his duel with Clay in 1826, or in 1831 when he 
 is reported to have been "weakened by age, excesses and disease." Thus 
 even an "original source" may have greater or less value according to the 
 circumstances. 
 
 Generally speaking, such a source when available is better than the nar- 
 rative or comment even of such reputable writers as Carl Schurz, Henry 
 Adams, McMaster or Hildreth, but practically such secondary material 
 must, very often be employed in in historical composition. One must only 
 keep in mind that other things being equal, the value of a narrative is in 
 direct ratio to its nearness to the original source. A fresh illustration 
 may suffice to show this truth. 
 
 Suppose that among the archives of Connecticut there is the clerk's 
 manuscript of a militia lav/ passed in 1670 requiring a quarterly muster 
 and training of all able-bodied men, and that soon after enactment the law 
 was printed. An historian of Connecticut is sufficiently impressed as he 
 reads this old volume to give a page and a half of the law. A special stu- 
 dent preparing a monograph on defense in the colonial period consults 
 this history of Connecticut and devotes perhaps a page to this measure of 
 1670. A scholar writing a great "monumental" work on the colonies 
 makes mention of the law as he finds it described in this monograph. 
 Professor ,A. in putting together his textbook reads among other things 
 this standard work on colonial history and gives a few lines to Connecti- 
 cut's milita as it was organized about the time of King Philip's War. A 
 journalist, writing an article on universal military service, remembers 
 the passage in Professor A's book and includes what he can recall of the 
 features of the law. The Honorable B. C. D. in addressing his constituents 
 on the Fourth of July with respect to the obligations of citizenship makes 
 a reference to this article he has recently read in a popular magazine, 
 which sets forth how the fathers of New England looked upon duty of all 
 men to fight for their country. The speech is printed in the local paper 
 and the law is disfcussed by Colonel E. at breakfast next morning. Mrs. 
 E., who listens to the Colonel, is thus ten degrees removed from the orig- 
 inal source and the liability of error in her statement to the Women's 
 Club on this subject is very great. 
 
 But, of course, history need not be presented in strict progression ac- 
 cording to the clock and calendar of time. As he synthesizes the data in 
 his mind the author may conclude to abandon the chronological arrange- 
 ment and treat his subject by topics, for it is possible to write in this man- 
 ner history, or even biography, as has been done so admirably by P. L. 
 Ford in his Many- Sided Franklin and True George Washington, and in 
 Gamaliel Bradford's Lee. It would be possible therefore for us entirely 
 to recast our outline as follows: » 
 
 [10] 
 
I National enthusiasm for western settlement. 
 
 1. Circumstances of settlement. 
 
 2. References in contemporary literature. 
 
 3. References in the compromise debate. 
 
 II State and federal relations as discussed in the debate. 
 
 III American Parliamentary practice as exhibited in the debate. 
 
 IV Arguments for slavery about 1S20. 
 
 V Arguments against slavery about 1820. 
 VI The free negro and citizenship as discussed in the debate. 
 VII The expediency of compromise in our federal system as discussed 
 in the debate. 
 
 Some subjects might thus be presented with superior convenience and 
 clarity; but, in the purely topical method of synthesis, there is lost the 
 sense of continuity and integration which are characteristics of social as 
 well as other life. 
 
 Would it not be better to combine the advantages of the two methods 
 by pausing here and there in the general chronologial account to treat 
 in topical expansion the controlling tendency or the theme which seems 
 dominant in the thought of the particular day or time which has been 
 reached? For example, when we get to 111,3, in our chronological out- 
 line, we might decide that this is an appropriate place to discuss, for a 
 little space, the idea of compromise as operative in previous American 
 history — in the great constitutional convention, legislative contests on 
 the tariff, etc. — just as a general summary of the contemporary views on 
 slavery which were revealed throughout the discussion and which we have 
 indicated in our topical scheme under items IV and V might well be set 
 forth in connection with the famous speeches of Pinkney and King men- 
 tioned as III, 3, b, in our first outline. 
 
 In his little book on The Writing of History (New Haven, 1920, pp. 
 141-142), Professor F. M. Fling gives a clear succinct direction as to how 
 one may include topical expansions in a chronological narrative: "Fol- 
 low one series as long as it occupies the center of the stage, allowing the 
 other series to drop out of sight. When the interest shifts to another 
 series, drop the first, but before following the new series from the point 
 where it impinges on the old, pick up as many of the back threads of the 
 new series as may be necessary for the understanding of what is to follow." 
 
 When the completed essay is submitted it should be accompanied by the 
 outline and a bibliography. In the preparation of the last the various ma- 
 terials should be classified as "Primary Sources" and "Other Sources" using 
 the word source in its broadest sense. Under the former heading one 
 should put into separate groups manuscripts, public documents, news- 
 papers, contemporary printed accounts including pamphlets, memoirs and 
 autobiographies, etc. In the second class should come general histories, 
 local histories, monographs, biographies, etc. Our previous discussion of 
 sources should make clear this scheme of classification. To give one more 
 
 [11] 
 
example: if the career of Martin Van Buren were under examination, 
 George Bancroft's biography written in the forties would be a primary 
 source, because of the personal acquaintance of the author with the sub- 
 ject, while Edward Morse Shepard's Life, published in 188S, though a 
 far more useful work, would not. With the complete citation of each book 
 taken from your cards should go your comment on its value based on your 
 own experience. Thus the bibliography becomes an important part of 
 your contribution, resulting as it does from thoughtful and intelligent in- 
 vestigation and criticism. 
 
 In conclusion we may say that the essay should demonstrate the writer's 
 ability to combine and digest information derived from a number of 
 sources, and the final product should represent a work as original as that 
 of a poet or a builder. Sentences should be rewritten until they satisfy in 
 meaning and in sound, until the author has the feeling of the artist, that 
 he lacks no word and no word can be spared, for scholarship and artistry, 
 truth and power, are complementary in the great achievements of his- 
 torians. The effectiveness of presentation will be carefully considered in 
 the critic's judgment, and a paper is as likely to be sent back with a 
 mark of "flossy", "annalistic" or "disjointed", as it is to be condemned as 
 "thin in substance" or "conclusions unwarranted by the facts". 
 
 [12] 
 
The Critical Review 
 
 The critic is not a base caviler, but the younger brother of genius. Next to 
 invention is the power of interpreting invention ; next to beauty the power of 
 appreciating beauty. — Margaret Fuller. 
 
 Several times during the year the student will be called upon to prepare " 
 a paper on some historical book. If one is going to pass an honest judg- 
 ment on a work it is clear that the first duty is carefully and thoroughly 
 to read it, taking note of its important features. The author may expect 
 this consideration from the reviewer, for a book is the fruit of toil and 
 thought. The great Petrarch, in speaking of his letters, puts the author's 
 case: "I desire", he says, "that my reader, whoever he may be, should 
 think of me alone, not of his daughter's wedding, his mistress's embraces, 
 the wiles of his enemy, his engagements, horse, lands or money. I want 
 him to pay attention to me. If his affairs are pressing, let him postpone 
 reading the letter, but when he does read, let him throw aside the burden 
 of business and family cares, and fix his mind upon the matter before 
 him. I do not wish him to carry on his business and attend to my letter 
 at the same time. I will not have him gain without any exertion what has 
 not been produced without labor on my part." 
 
 After careful reading, with his notes arranged in order, the reviewer 
 begins upon his composition. In such a piece of writing it is obviously 
 well to intrigue the attention of the prospective reader at the start by 
 some remarks of general introduction, to lead him from concerns of his 
 own day's routine into a mood in which he can appreciate the essay which 
 is to be set before him. Since the book is the product of a certain human 
 mind and inevitably bears the marks of its creator's strength or weakness, 
 it is also desirable to discover and to state the bare facts, of the author's 
 life and the effect which his environment and the circumstances of his 
 career were bound to have upon his views and his work. What merits, if 
 any, have been ascribed to his work in general? What experience or 
 preparation qualified him to undertake the task in hand? Exactly when 
 and under what conditions was it written? 
 
 Thus equipped, the student addresses himself to the review, which is 
 expected to accomplish two quite different ends. In the first place it is 
 expected to furnish bibliographical information about the book, that is, 
 not only in the beginning an accurate statement of the title, author, 
 date, pagination, etc. (for example Alexayider Hamilton: An Essay 
 on American Union. By Frederick S. Oliver. London and New York, 
 1917 — 502 pp.), but a setting forth of the plan and scope of the 
 work, a clear rehearsal of the main ideas developed and a careful* 
 report of the kind of sources and method which the author has apparently 
 used. Were the authorities he cites really contemporaneous records of 
 the events he here recounts? The seeming formality of such a summary 
 
 [13] 
 
should not dissuade the reviewer from using whatever art he may possess, 
 as an intelligible summary requires not only insight in discerning what 
 is of primary importance, but considerable sympathy and facility to ex- 
 press in a few written pages the substance of a volume. It is hoped that 
 by this practice the student will himself learn to read more intelligently. 
 
 So far his point of view has been inside the book, noting and recording 
 its features as a work of scholarship. But this is not all, nor, indeed, has 
 it brought into play the highest powers of the mind. The student must 
 now summon his faculties of criticism wisely to evaluate what he has con- 
 sidered and described. He has indicated in general the author's purpose; 
 it is now his function to sit in judgment to decide in how far that purpose 
 has been realized. Does the book tell you what you wish to know about 
 the subject? Do you find evidence of ill-reasoned organization, i. e., a 
 presentation of certain facts in one connection which might more logically 
 be presented in another? Is there any material which seems to you ir- 
 relevant, or does all serve the general purpose? Does the author's style 
 attract or repel the reader? Is there a lack or superfluity of detail, or is 
 there just enough to make clear his pictures or his points? Does he offer 
 a full narrative or does he presuppose the reader's knowledge of the facts, 
 and content himself with comment? Does he seem fair in his interpreta- 
 tion of evidence or do his judgments seem unwarranted by the facts he 
 cites? Why, if at all, should anyone pay money for this book and spend 
 time in reading it? Does it succeed as well as other books you know 
 upon this or similar subjects? Considering the mans'- things that men 
 and women have to do, is it wise to foster interest in such subjects? To 
 whom would you recommend such reading, and why? 
 
 These are not questions that can be answered without thought and in 
 thus measuring the book in the larger terms of human experience, the re- 
 view will gain a value of its own. There is no need, of course, as reference 
 to any number of The Amo-ican Historical Rerieic or various other jour- 
 nals will illustrate, for the reviewer to draw a line between description 
 and criticism, putting into part one what the book says and into part two 
 what is said about it. Rather, as a rule, the two will go side by side to 
 attract or warn the general reading public for whom, it is supposed, the 
 review is prepared. 
 
 But perhaps these brief and elementary suggestions should not be 
 brought to a close without a word of caution. From the nature of this little 
 booklet they are intended for students and writers of comparatively small 
 experience and it may seem that a critical review is in itself an enter- 
 prise of too much dignity for one with such equipment. Respectable criti- 
 cism, it is true, will generally come from those who themselves have 
 thought long and fruitfully upon the subjects of the works that they dis- 
 cuss. Even these with all their qualifications should approach a book 
 freshly come to hand with humility and hope, for it may prove a con- 
 'tribution well deserving of a welcome. In Milton's phrase, "A good book 
 is the precious life-blood of a master spirit, embalmed and treasured up on 
 purpose to a life beyond life"; lest the work that he sets out to study 
 should prove one of those, no critic can afford to start in flippancy or 
 
 [14] 
 
captiousness. The exercise we here propose is not intended to make 
 literary coxcombs, and the mind should have a reason, sincere and well- 
 considered, before each judgment is set down. Do not too jauntily assume 
 the role of censor. But, it may readily be admitted, experience shows 
 that such counsel is not often necessary. Rather the novice quails before 
 the printed page as something with a magic sacredness, and the too, too 
 gentle reader forgets that he has rights. Even a great work may fall 
 some short of perfection; at least it cannot be immune from shrewd 
 analysis to find wherein its merits lie. 
 
 [15] 
 
LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 
 
 018 487 070 8