of Cape Finisterre was granted in 1730, not during the years 1765-1767 (p. 92). Naval stores were not the only commodities which American ships could transport to England under the trade regulations adopted by the English government after the Revolution (p. 112). The settlement on the Tennessee, shown in the map on p. 125, was, in fact, on the Cumberland. Benton was in favor of restoring the circulation of gold, not of the silver dollar, as stated on p. 198. The Chesapeake. and Ohio Canal did not reach Cumberland nor did the national road reach St. Louis in 1830, as shown on the map on p. 206. Michigan, not the United States, built the locks at Sault Ste. Marie in 1855, although the United States made a land grant for the purpose (p. 234). Early railroad charters were in many cases liberal but they did not fix maximum freight rates of "five, three, and two dollars per ton mile" (p. 240). $270,000,000 is certainly an excessive estimate for the sum expended on canals up to 1837 (p. 242). The Wilson Act, as passed, did not impose a duty on wool, as is distinctly implied on p. 303. The Act of 1878 required the coinage of 2,000,000 to 4,000,000 dollars' worth of silver, not from 2,000,000 to 4,000,000 dollars, each month (p. 314). The purchase of silver under the Sherman Act ceased in November, 1893, not December, 1894 (p. 317). Some of these inaccuracies are of minor importance, but the list might be considerably extended did time and space permit.

While the bibliography is useful, many of the references which we might expect to find, even in a brief bibliography, and which would be most helpful to the student, have not been included. It also is not free from inaccuracies. E. Benjamin Andrews appears as Benjamin J. Andrews (p. xi), and Bishop's History of American Manufactures is referred to (p. xii) as published in two instead of three volumes.

HENRY B. GARDNER.

A History of the Pacific Northwest. By JOSEPH SCHAFER, M.L., Head of the Department of History, University of Oregon. (New York: The Macmillan Company; London: Macmillan and Company. 1905. Pp. xvi, 321.)

PROFESSOR SCHAFER'S History of the Pacific Northwest is a school text-book. This is apparent from its format and from the statement in the preface that it is "primarily intended" to "promote a more intelligent interest in northwestern history among the youth of this region ". Some if not all of the states carved out of old Oregon" require the study of local history in the schools, and this book is presumably intended to meet the demand for a text incident to this requirement. The book is well written, and its statements are remarkably accurate.

66

Professor Schafer's original contribution to Oregon history consists of a collection of extracts from early Western newspapers, relating to the emigrations of 1843, 1844, and 1845, which he has partly printed in the Quarterly of the Oregon Historical Society and upon which he has largely drawn in the present work. The only criticism that the

book suggests is that it presents the history of the Oregon question so largely from the local point of view that it scarcely gives an adequate impression of the immense amount of time devoted by the government to its discussion and rather exaggerates the influence of events in Oregon upon government action. Professor Schafer thinks (p. 213) that there is "no doubt" but that the change in the situation in Oregon affected the negotiation between the British and American governments, but there is no evidence that it did. The diplomatic correspondence continued to thresh over the old straw. Moreover the only portion of the territory really in controversy was that north of the Columbia River, and with respect to that part the American immigration had not yet materially changed the situation. Professor Schafer further thinks (p. 218) that the Whitman massacre "forced" the organization of Oregon upon Congress. It is true that the report of the massacre caused Congress to take up the bill for organization, but it is more likely that it was the nomination of Van Buren by the Free-soil party, upon a platform demanding "established institutions for our brethren in Oregon", which secured its passage in the Senate.

Except for this neglect of the national point of view, Professor Schafer's book could scarcely be improved. It is particularly to be commended for its frank recognition of the services rendered by the Hudson's Bay Company to the early American settlers and for its acceptance of the Oregon treaty as a fair settlement of the questions in controversy. It is almost superfluous to add that Dr. Whitman resumes in these pages his proper place in the history of the Oregon missions and no longer. masquerades as the "savior" of the country.

The substance of this volume, written somewhat larger but upon the same lines, forms the greater part of Professor Schafer's history of The Pacific Slope and Alaska, which is the tenth volume in the co-operative History of North America, of which Dr. Guy Carleton Lee was formerly editor.

F. H. HODDer.

COMMUNICATION

President Johnson's First Annual Message

PROFESSOR DUNNING'S admirable article on the authorship of President Johnson's messages leaves one point undetermined: he shows conclusively that Johnson did not write the message of December 4, 1865. but he does not investigate the sources of the ideas therein contained. The quest is indeed of minor importance, because it is made plain that Bancroft was chosen to draft it precisely because his views largely coincided with those of the President. While, however, of little significance, it is not without interest.

The message falls into two parts. (The edition by Richardson was used.) Paragraphs twenty-three to thirty-seven inclusive summarize the work of the departments and were doubtless contributed by the heads of the respective departments. The remaining paragraphs were written by Bancroft and form the important part of the message. The first is conventionally introductory and is not at all in the Johnsonian vein. The next, a full page, is a discussion of the constitutionality of secession, following exactly, in sequence of argument, a much longer discussion in Johnson's most famous speech, that of December 18 and 19, 1860 (Speeches of Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, edited by Frank Moore, Boston, 1865, pp. 112-120). Some of the illustrations are taken, however, from other places; the quotation from Jefferson was perhaps suggested by a later portion of the same speech (ibid., 163), while the reference to Jefferson as an asserter of the integrity of the Union was constantly in Johnson's mouth during the war (e. g., ibid., 294). The third does not seem to be based on any particular passage, though it is thoroughly Johnsonian. The fourth is roughly paralleled in the speech already referred to (ibid., 106), which also contains the quotation from Jackson's Nullification Proclamation, summarized by the fifth paragraph (ibid., 111). The sixth and the first part of the seventh are purely conventional; the last two-thirds of the seventh was evidently modelled on an address of the President to an Indiana delegation in April, 1865 (ibid., 481-484). Paragraphs eight to eleven inclusive summarize the presidential plan of reconstruction, as it was known and discussed in every paper in the country. Paragraph twelve follows closely a passage in the previously cited speech of 1860 (ibid., 100). Paragraph thirteen is strongly reminiscent of an interview with George L. Stearns, whose account, dated October 3, 1865, was signed and approved by the President (John Savage, The Life and Public Services of Andrew Johnson, New York, 1866, appendix, p. 102). Para

graphs fourteen to sixteen are largely explanatory of the most recent actions of the administration, and therefore one would not expect to find for them a literary source. Still the sixteenth resembles an address to a delegation of Loyal Southerners in April, 1865 (Moore, Speeches, 480).

The burden of the message up to this point is constitutional. Paragraph seventeen takes up the negro problem. The last part of this and the next paragraph are based on the interview with Mr. Stearns (Savage, Life of Johnson, app., 102). Paragraph nineteen is based on the President's admirable, though far from cordial speech of October 10, 1865, to the soldiers of the First Regiment of Colored Volunteers from the District of Columbia (ibid., app., 90-95). Paragraph twenty follows first the same speech; the middle section seems to be from the President's reply to a delegation from Pennsylvania on April 27, 1865 (Life, Speeches and Services of Andrew Johnson, Philadelphia, T. B. Peterson and Brothers, 1865, pp. 160-161); for the last part I find no parallel. Paragraphs twenty-one and twenty-two discuss monopolies. The twenty-first paragraph is a section of the address last mentioned; for twenty-two I find no parallel, though it is peculiarly Johnsonian.

Paragraphs thirty-eight to forty-two are of the nature of a conclusion. Of these, the last part of forty recalls an address of Johnson while Vice-president, at Washington, April 3, 1865 (Moore, Speeches, xliv); forty-two reminds one of the concluding portion of his interview with the South Carolina Delegation, October 13, 1865 (Savage, Life, app., 100).

Johnson was not without pride in his speeches; he constantly referred those who wished to know what his policy would be to his record. Doubtless he gave Bancroft the same general direction, and the latter went to work with his trained historical skill to extract the grain from the chaff. It is not necessary, however, to suppose that the historian had directly before him the more recent speeches of the President, though they were all, in some form or other, in print. It is equally possible that the President discussed these matters with him independently, and possibly others for which no direct parallel has been found. It is, at any rate, evident that the attempt was made to have the message voice Johnson's ideas. One cannot, however, read the parallel passages without realizing that the impression created by the message was due to the marshalling of these ideas by Bancroft and the general spirit of moderation which he was able to infuse in the whole.

CARL RUSSELL FISH.

NOTES AND NEWS

GENERAL

Mr. Woodbury Lowery, the author of The Spanish Settlements within the Present Limits of the United States, died in Sicily on April II at the age of fifty-three. Until 1897 he practised patent law, publishing several law-books. The later years of his life were devoted to historical research in the archives and libraries of Mexico, Seville, London, and Rome. The first volume of his work entitled The Spanish Settlements was published in 1901, and the second, embracing the history of Florida from 1562 to 1574, in 1905. He had made notes for several more volumes. It is understood that he has provided for the continuance of the work, and that he has given his collection of maps and historical notes to the Library of Congress. His death means a distinct loss to historical scholarship, for his work combined in a rare degree accuracy of statement with charm of literary style.

Señor Carlos Calvo, the Argentine publicist and historian and one of the greatest authorities on international law, died in May at the age of eighty-two. He had represented his country at many European capitals, and at the time of his death was its representative at Paris. His best-known works are his Derecho Internacional Teórico y Prático de Europa y América and his Recueil Complet des Traités, Conventions, etc., de tous les Etats de l'Amérique Latine depuis l'Année 1493 jusqu'à Nos Jours (1862-1869).

Dr. Wilhelm von Heyd, director of the royal library in Stuttgart, died in February at the age of eighty-two. He is most widely known as the author of the Geschichte des Levantehandels im Mittelalter (Stuttgart, 1879, 2 vols.), which was published in augmented form in a French edition in 1885-1886. Among his other writings are Beiträge zur Geschichte des deutschen Handels (1890); and Bibliographie der württembergischen Geschichte, 2 vols. (1895-1896).

Dr. A. H. J. Greenidge, Fellow of St. John's College, Oxford, and author of several valuable works on Roman and Greek history, died on March 11 at the age of forty. In 1904 appeared the first volume of what promised to be his most important work: A History of Rome during the Later Republic and Early Principate.

Brother Marcellino da Civezza, the author of several historical works chiefly relating to the sources of Franciscan history, died in April at an advanced age. In collaboration with T. Domenichelli he published La Leggenda di San Francesco scritta de Tre Suoi Compagni (Legenda Trium Sociorum) publicata per la Prima Volta nella Vera sua Integrita