- 
 
* 
 
 ff. 
 
 V 
 
 REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT 
 
 BY THE 
 
 COMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENT METHODS. 
 
 Documentary Historical Publications of the 
 United States Government. 
 


 WASHINGTON, January //, igog. 
 To the PRESIDENT : 
 
 As directed by you, the Committee on Department Methods appointed the 
 following gentlemen as an Assistant Committee on the Documentary Historical 
 Publications of the United States Government: Mr. Charles Francis Adams, 
 president of the Massachusetts Historical Society; Prof. Charles M. Andrews, of 
 the Johns Hopkins University; Prof. William A. Dunning, of Columbia University; 
 Mr. Worthington C. Ford, Chief of the Division of Manuscripts in the Library of 
 Congress; Prof. Albert Bushnell Hart, of Harvard University; Mr. J. Franklin 
 Jameson, director of the Department of Historical Research in the Carnegie 
 Institution; Prof. Andrew C. McLaughlin, of the University of Chicago; Rear- 
 Admiral Alfred T. Mahan, U. S. Xa\ v, retired, and Prof. Frederick J. Turner, of 
 the University of Wisconsin. Mr. Ford was, at your suggestion, designated as 
 chairman. 
 
 The Committee on Department Methods submits herewith a report by this 
 Assistant Committee, and also a draft of a proposed bill which provides for the 
 creation of a permanent Commission on National Historical Publications. 
 
 We are in accord with the recommendations contained in the report. 
 Yours, very respectfully, 
 
 LAWRENCE O. MURRAY, 
 
 GlFFORD PlXCHOT, 
 
 Committee on Department Methods. 
 
 (3) 
 
 311809 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Page. 
 
 1 . A review of the course hitherto pursued by the Government in the matter of historical 
 
 publications, indicating the cost, criticising the want of method, and showing the present 
 moment to be an opportune time for reform 5 
 
 2. A general survey of the field of United States history, showing what has been done to 
 
 cover it by Government documentary publications, and especially what gaps exist in 
 
 the record, needing to be filled by Government action: 
 
 Constitutional and political history 9 
 
 Financial and commercial history 19 
 
 ^Economic and social history 23 
 
 Diplomatic history 
 
 Military history 29 
 
 Naval history 31 
 
 3. Recapitulation of the recommendations made in the course of this survey, most of them 
 
 being summed up in the recommendation of a series of National State Papers, con 
 ceived as a continuation, modernized, of the old American State Papers 34 
 
 4. General considerations as to the proper policy to be pursued by the Government in respect 
 
 to historical publications 34 
 
 5. A statement of the system pursued by other governments 36 
 
 6. Suggestions for a permanent Commission on National Historical Publications, and as to 
 
 its mode of operation 39 
 
 7. Draft of a bill to create a permanent Commission on National Historical Publications .... 41 
 
 (41 
 
WASHINGTON, D. C., November 24, 1908. 
 GENTLEMEN: 
 
 The undersigned committee was called into existence by the Committee on 
 Department Methods in consequence of an instruction from the President from which, 
 in your letter requesting- us to serve, you quote the following paragraph as indicating 
 the objects of our appointment: 
 
 With a view to the adoption of a more systematic and effective method of dealing with the 
 problem of documentary historical publications of the United States Government, so as to secure a 
 maximum of economy and efficiency, you are instructed to consider the desirability of reviewing, 
 with the aid of a subcommittee of experts, the whole "field of documentary publications which 
 consist wholly or mainly of material for the history of the United States, and framing a preliminary 
 plan which will represent the deliberate judgment of historical experts and serve to guide subsequent 
 governmental work of this kind into the best channels. 
 
 In accordance with this instruction and the terms used by you in appointing 
 the subcommittee, we beg leave to submit the following report, dealing with (a) the 
 course hitherto pursued by the Government in the printing of volumes of documentary 
 historical material; (b] the ground covered by such volumes already published and 
 the extent to which they serve the interests of workers in our national history; (c] 
 the gaps to be noted in our historical record which might be filled by Government 
 publications, and (d] the possibility of putting into operation a system whereby such 
 issues might be steadily kept to a high standard of quality and to a scientific plan, 
 orderly and rational. 
 
 We wish to make it plain at the outset that our object is not to propose vast and 
 disproportionate expenditures for a subject which deeply interests us, but rather to 
 make suggestions which are in the interest of genuine economy. We assume that 
 the publication of documentary historical materials is a regular function of all 
 civilized governments, and that the Government and people of the United States are 
 willing to spend reasonable sums of money in such publication; but we believe that 
 the way to better results lies through more carefulness in planning and executing 
 rather than through more lavish expenditure. Our report ranges over many fields 
 and discusses many desirable undertakings; but nothing could be further from our 
 thoughts than to propose vast schemes for instant execution. Instant execution 
 would be bad execution. We have endeavored to look forward into the future and to 
 frame large plans, which can be executed in parts and developed by time and 
 experience, after the analogy of a group of farseeing architects who should frame 
 large plans for the improvement and future development of a great modern city, but 
 without expecting that all things should be done or even resolved upon at once. 
 
 THE COURSE HITHERTO PURSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT. 
 
 Like all other enlightened governments, that of the United States has felt the 
 obligation to publish historical materials, as among the surest means of maintaining 
 an intelligent national patriotism. As early as 1799 provision was made for the 
 
 (5) 
 
reprinting of the Journals of the Continental Congress. The ten years beginning 
 with 1817 saw the publication of the Journal of the Federal Convention of 1787, of 
 the collection of State Papers known as Wait s, of the Secret Journals of the 
 Continental Congress, and of reprints of its ordinary journal and of the Journals of 
 the Senate and House of Representatives. 
 
 In proportion to the resources of the Government and the country, the period 
 from 1829 to 1 86 1 may fairly be declared to have been the most active in historical 
 publication. Beside spending $130,000 in the purchase of the manuscripts of the 
 earlier statesmen, Congress provided in greater or less measure, directly or indirectly, 
 for the issue of Sparks s Diplomatic Correspondence of the American Revolution, the 
 Diplomatic Correspondence of 1783-1789, Force s American Archives, the Madison 
 Papers, the Works of Jefferson and Hamilton, the Letters and Other Writings of 
 Madison, and, greatest undertaking of all, the 38 folio volumes of the American 
 State Papers, the last a series of which any nation may be proud, presenting in 
 methodical arrangement all the chief administrative papers of our first forty years 
 under the Constitution. 
 
 All this constituted a creditable achievement for a young nation not yet rich. 
 But it is distinctly miscellaneous. It gives no evidence, except in the case of the 
 great series of the American State Papers, of a general plan devised beforehand and 
 based on careful thought as to what was most needed toward the development of 
 American history. And in the second place the relations of the Government to these 
 publications, both in respect to supervision and in respect to finance, were most 
 various, evincing no settled theory as to how government historical publication 
 should be conducted. 
 
 For the period since the civil war we can set over against the various products of 
 the antebellum period the most extensive and costly historical enterprise ever carried 
 through by any government, the Official Records of the War of the Rebellion, 
 published in 128 volumes at a cost computed at $2,858,000. It is a monument of 
 which the nation may be proud, though doubtless it is needlessly voluminous in 
 certain parts. But as to consistency and continuity of plan, we have only to remark 
 that during the preparation of the work eight changes of system were, by 
 Congressional or departmental authority, effected in the procedure of editing. We 
 ma} 7 also mention, as illustrating the evils attendant upon a lack of preliminary- 
 scientific planning, that beside the well-known 128 volumes a series of not fewer 
 than 79 volumes, composed on an earlier and faulty plan, was put into type and 
 printed to the extent of 30 copies. These volumes have never had any use, 
 except to serve as printer s copy for the more satisfactory compilation. Moreover, 
 the process of putting them into type and printing 30 .copies of each was continued 
 for eight years after the publication of the first volume of the series which superseded 
 them. A stronger illustration of the need of better supervision over the Government s 
 historical publications, in the interest of quality and economy, could hardly be 
 imagined. 
 
 Including this gigantic series, and the Naval Records of the War which 
 accompanies it, the Government has since 1890 expended nearly three million 
 dollars ($2,875,183) in printing documentary texts, calendars of manuscripts, and 
 
other historical volumes, an average of $159,737 per annum. In some cases full 
 value has been received, but in others the historical worth of the result was 
 unimportant and the volumes brought credit neither to the Government nor to the 
 compilers. 
 
 The truth of these criticisms of the present system, or want of system, may be 
 seen by a glance at the following table. It exhibits the titles and, so far as it can 
 readily be traced, the cost of practically all the Government s historical publications 
 since 1890. 
 
 TEXTS. 
 
 Official Records of the War of the Rebellion* $1,881,821 
 
 Official Records of the War, Naval 205,314 
 
 Messages and Papers of the Presidents ( 10 volumes ) 257,899 
 
 Records of the Virginia Company 6,942 
 
 Journals of the Continental Congress (12 volumes) 24,000 
 
 Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence (6 volumes) 56,431 
 
 Documentary History of the Constitution (3 volumes) 24,591 
 
 State Papers on the Purchase of Louisiana 2,282 
 
 Jefferson s Morals of Jesus " 21, 258 
 
 Journals of the Confederate Congress (7 volumes) 22,549 
 
 Treaties and Conventions 1 1 ,452 
 
 Treaties now in Force 2,964 
 
 Digest of International Law (Wharton) (3 volumes) 18,623 
 
 Digest of International Law (Moore) (8 volumes) 56, 181 
 
 CALENDARS. 
 
 Calendars of the Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Franklin, Jones, 
 
 and Vernon- Wager papers 22,501 
 
 COMPILATIONS. 
 
 Annual Reports of the American Historical Association, 1894 to date (21 
 
 volumes) 80,354 
 
 International Arbitrations (Moore) (6 volumes) 53,368 
 
 Celebration of Establishment of Government 12,273 
 
 Historical Register United States Army 1 1 ,993 
 
 Legislative History of General Staff 5,303 
 
 Alphabetical List of Battles i ,624 
 
 Daughters of the American Revolution i ,445 
 
 History of the Capitol 24,338 
 
 History of the Currency 2 , 720 
 
 History of Education, Contributions to 57,016 
 
 History of the Library of Congress 6,457 
 
 History of Public Buildings 3,4^4 
 
 Total 2,875,183 
 
 The amount of historical material thus presented is ample, and the expenditure 
 has been more than liberal. But the list as a whole shows plainly the absence of a 
 general plan. It is not only miscellaneous, but in some respects casual. It needs 
 
 " Most of the data are derived from the report of the Printing Investigation Committee of 1906. 
 ft Publication of the series began in 1 88 1 . 
 
8 
 
 uo demonstration that, with the same amount of expenditure, or less if need be, our 
 Government could, by having a methodical plan representing expert opinion, make 
 its efforts and expenditures more effective, avoid waste and duplication, and bring out 
 a product more useful and satisfactory to historians and the reading public. 
 
 The time is ripe for pursuing such a course. All the series mentioned above 
 have now been brought to a conclusion except the Naval Records, the Journals of 
 the Continental Congress, and, of course, the reports of the American Historical Asso 
 ciation, which are annual." The printing of the Naval Records and the Journals of 
 the Continental Congress is costing about $16,000 per annum. These two excellent 
 series should of course be continued. But this is all that the Government is doing 
 at present. Its historical publication is at a fit point for making a fresh start. The 
 ground is not encumbered, as at times it has been, by existing enterprises hard to 
 reconcile or combine into an}* consistent scheme. The Government has practically 
 a free hand, and should use this opportune moment to think out a rational plan for 
 the future. 
 
 This plan our committee has been invited to supply. As an indispensable first 
 step, it has made a careful review of the whole field of documentary publications for 
 the history of the United States. First, it divided our whole national history into 
 convenient sections, embracing all periods and all the chief aspects of the record- 
 constitutional, political, financial, economic, social, diplomatic, military, and naval 
 history. These were assigned respectively to the members most expert in their con 
 sideration. Each then prepared a careful survey of the special field assigned to him, 
 reporting upon (a) the materials for that period or aspect of American history already 
 in print, whether issued by the Federal Government or otherwise; (b) the volumes or 
 series of documentary material which might best be undertaken by Federal authority 
 with a view to filling gaps and making more complete the body of available material; 
 (c) the probable magnitude of each such undertaking; (d) the relative importance of 
 the enterprises thus designated as desirable, or the order in which they might best 
 be taken up. 
 
 The preliminary reports thus prepared by the individual members of the 
 committee were sent out in copies to all the other members for consideration and 
 comment. A second general meeting was then held for their discussion. The 
 results, so far as they relate to the existing status of documentation in the various 
 fields of American history and the possibilities of its improvement, are stated in the 
 next section. 
 
 The subsequent sections present (a) a summary of the chief recommendations 
 made in the course of the survey; (b} certain general considerations which seem to 
 the committee worthy of remark; (c} a description of the organization and method of 
 procedure observed by the governments of other countries in dealing with their 
 historical works; and (d) suggestions, followed by a draft of a bill, for a permanent 
 Commission on National Historical Publications. 
 
 "And one volume of the History of the Library of Congress. 
 
SURVEY OF THE: FIF.LD GAPS IN THE HISTORICAL RECORD. 
 A. CONSTITUTIONAL AND POLITICAL HISTORY. 
 
 I. COLONIAL PERIOD. 
 
 Of most portions of our colonial histor}^ it may be said with truth that it is the 
 business of state governments and historical societies to supply the documents by 
 means of which the history of individual colonies, and local history in general, may 
 be written. The United States Government has, therefore, usually left to such 
 agencies the printing of material relating to colonial history before 1774. But there 
 are two phases of colonial history that transcend the fields of purely local activity 
 and come within the purview of the National Government. These phases are, first, 
 the relation of the colonies as a whole to the British Government, and, second, the 
 movement toward union among the colonies themselves. 
 
 During the colonial period the only central authority to which all the colonies 
 were subject was the British Government. As the highest governmental power it 
 corresponded in a sense to the Federal Government of to-day, and anticipated some 
 of its forms, so that the history of its colonial organization and action is in many 
 particulars the early historv of our federal organization and action. Whatever 
 material, therefore, serves to elucidate the relations between the colonies as a whole 
 and the British Government, or between that Government and its official agents in 
 America, is legitimately a matter of concern to the United States Government, and 
 the publication of such material, which lies beyond the scope of state, historical 
 society, or private individual, should be made a national undertaking. 
 
 Formal and continuous records of the colonial activity of the British Govern 
 ment, comparable to the journals of Congress, exist in the shape of two great bodies 
 of unprinted material the Register of the Privy Council, 1613-1783, and the Jour 
 nal of the Board of Trade and Foreign Plantations, 1660-1663, 1675-1782. But the 
 British Government itself, aided by that of Canada and by the American Historical 
 Association, has already begun the printing, in a series of 5 volumes entitled "Acts 
 of the Privy Council (Colonial)," of those portions of the former record relating to 
 America ; while of the latter, the Journal of the Board of Trade, a complete transcript 
 has been obtained by the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, to which its issue in 
 print may therefore appropriately be left. 
 
 For similar reasons, the National Government may leave at one side three other 
 series which have a continental scope and significance and are important to the 
 proper development of our colonial history, but are in a fair way to be executed by 
 other means. A prominent scholar is understood to be preparing as a private enter 
 prise a collection of all the British statutes relating to America; the American Anti 
 quarian Society is dealing similarly with the series of royal proclamations, and the 
 Carnegie Institution with the American proceedings and debates in Parliament. 
 
 Commissions and instructions to governors. But the operation of the Imperial 
 Government may be traced witfi almost an equal degree of continuity in another 
 series of documents, only less important than the two records named first above, 
 
 65420 09 2 
 
10 
 
 and this is the commissions, instructions, "additional instructions," warrants, and 
 inferior commissions issued by royal authority to royal governors of colonies. 
 Although these documents relate respectively to individual colonies, yet since 
 they were issued, one after another, by the same power, and drawn up successively 
 by the Board of Trade or other official authority for the guidance and use of the 
 royal governors in the colonies, they have a high importance for the general consti 
 tutional history of the colonies, enabling us to trace the development of governmental 
 policy and practice on American soil. In a few instances the commissions have been 
 obtained and printed by the States and by private societies and individuals, but the 
 undertaking as a whole is too large for private enterprise and should be promoted by 
 the National Government. Scarcely any of the instructions, etc., have been printed, 
 though it is probable that a complete set of all these documents could be obtained. 
 The work should be very carefully edited, not only that every possible document 
 should be obtained, but that repetitions should be avoided. Many of the documents 
 are but copies of similar documents previously issued, containing only a few varia 
 tions. Such variations, however, require to be carefully noted, since in these changes 
 lies the progressive development of the policy of the home Government. 
 
 Charters and constitutions. The constitutional history of some colonies rests 
 upon charters or letters patent from the Crown, or upon similar fundamental docu 
 ments. A complete collection of these is a desideratum. If we do not place it in 
 the same rank as the preceding item (commissions, etc.), it is for two reasons. The 
 first is that the commissions and instructions, being more frequent and less formal 
 and rigid, cast a more abundant light on the processes of constitutional development, 
 and that, though from popular reasonings one might infer the contrary, British 
 colonial government was chiefly and typically government under royal commissions 
 and instructions and not government under colonial charters. 
 
 In the second place, we have to take account of an existing, though confessedly 
 very imperfect, collection, Poore s Charters and Constitutions, and of the fact that a 
 new edition has already been prepared and is all in type at the Government Print 
 ing Office. The qualities of this new edition are a matter of warm dispute. It is 
 possible that, owing to disagreements respecting payment for the work of editing 
 (disagreements referred last winter to a committee of the House of Representatives 
 and not yet reported upon), it may never be published. Without expressing any 
 opinion on its merits (though we may point to the dispute itself as an evidence of 
 the need of an expert committee of advice on historical publications undertaken by 
 Congress), we may say that no part of the original Poore was so defective as this 
 colonial portion; that the completest scholarship would be requisite in order to deter 
 mine, on legal and historical grounds, all the documents which belonged in such a 
 series; and that certainly, in order to tell the story of development which it is 
 designed to tell, it ought to include the whole series of letters patent for continental 
 American and West Indian colonies and not simply those hitherto embraced in such 
 collections. 
 
 If the edition of Poore, now under discussion, is not published, the committee 
 would not recommend that the Government again unite in one collection the charters 
 of the colonial period and the state constitutions of later times. The two tasks 
 require different qualifications in the editor, and their association tends to produce 
 
II 
 
 an exaggerated impression of the extent to which the constitutions were derived 
 from the charters. 
 
 Correspondence of tlie British Secretaries of State. We have in the English 
 archives, in letter books and letters received, on the one hand the correspondence of 
 the Secretary of State with colonial governors and other civil officials in America, 
 and on the other hand his correspondence and that of the Admiralty and the Secre 
 tary at War with commanders in chief of the arm} 7 in America and with admirals of 
 the fleets in American waters. Both series are very extensive, especially after 1765. 
 Probably not a tenth part of either has been printed. Both are continental or 
 national in their bearings, not local or confined to one colon}* or State. Carefully 
 composed selections from them would be invaluable for colonial history and for that 
 of the War of Independence, through which they should of course be continued 
 without break. 
 
 Plans of union. The second aspect of colonial history with which the United 
 States Government might legitimately concern itself is the development of the idea 
 and practice of union and the history of colonial congresses to 1774. A series 
 of documents relating to this subject, prepared by the late Mr. F. D. Stone, was 
 printed in Carson s Constitution of the United States, but it was manifestly incom 
 plete and is not readily accessible. A new edition of all these documents, particu 
 larly of the proceedings of the Albany Congress of 1754 and the Stamp Act Congress 
 of 1/65, with such supplemental material as will elucidate the texts, is greatly 
 needed. 
 
 2. REVOLUTIONARY AND FORMATIVE PERIOD, 1774-1789. 
 
 In one material particular the entire period since 1774 differs from the preceding, 
 namely, that the Federal Government itself possesses most of the original materials 
 necessary for elucidating its own history. It will have been perceived that we are 
 by no means disposed to recommend that it confine its historical publications to 
 materials which are in its own possession. That would be an unscientific course, 
 substituting, for such standards as make for rational completeness, criteria dependent 
 on the accidents of deposit or ownership. But in those fields in which we must 
 expect the main work of the Government to consist in printing what it has, our task 
 of survey and recommendation has been greatly aided by the existence of a systematic 
 inventory in the new edition of Van Tyne and Leland s Guide to the Archives of the 
 Government of the United States in Washington, of which we have made large use. 
 
 In proportion to the amount of extant material, the constitutional and political 
 history of the whole period 17741829 has been more completely covered by docu- 
 mentary publication than any other. Many portions of the field have been so amply 
 supplied that new governmental enterprises could not be recommended. 
 
 Particularly is this true of the first of the chronological divisions into which the 
 period naturally falls, embracing the vears 1774-1789. The new edition of the 
 Journals of the Continental Congress, now being published by the Library of 
 Congress, and the proposed volumes of letters from its members describing its doings, 
 to be published by the Carnegie Institution of Washington, leave only one important 
 desideratum with respect to the constitutional and political action of the Federal 
 Government in 1774-1787, namely, that the Journals should be accompanied by a 
 
12 
 
 body of selections from the papers of the Continental Congress. These papers, 
 petitions, letters, etc., have been printed to but a minor extent. They are of great 
 importance as exhibiting more fully than the Journals can do the grounds of the 
 actions of Congress, and for the light which they cast on all phases of the struggle 
 for independence and new national organization. 
 
 Professor Farrand s monumental Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 
 should certainly be printed by the Government if not soon published otherwise. If 
 that most useful work were once issued, we should think that, since we already have 
 Elliot s Debates and the writings of the chief statesmen concerned in the Convention, 
 it would be superfluous for the Federal Government to project any further documentary 
 publications in illustration of the formation and adoption of the Constitution. 
 
 The constitutional and political history of the States during these years is, with 
 the exception noted in the next paragraph, best left to them for documentation. 
 New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, 
 and Georgia have already provided for this nearly or quite as well as the materials in 
 their possession permit. 
 
 State constitutions. There exists a very active demand for a new edition of that 
 portion of Poore s Charters and Constitutions which includes the State constitutions, 
 and the fundamental documents for provisional government immediately preceding 
 them, from 1774 on. Everyone would be disposed to name this as one of the fore 
 most desiderata. In a preceding paragraph allusion has been made to the existing 
 attempt to meet this want, and the recommendation has been made that, in case the 
 edition mentioned should not be accepted and printed by Congress, the charters of 
 the colonial era and the State constitutions of the later period should be treated as 
 separate collections. Since 1876, the point at which Poore brought his work to a 
 conclusion, at least twenty-three new constitutions have gone into effect, many con 
 stitutional amendments have been adopted, and acts of Congress organizing or 
 fundamentally affecting civil government in several Territories have been passed. 
 Moreover, Poore s publication was marked by material omissions, such as that of 
 the Iowa constitution of 1857. A new edition is imperatively required; the lapse of 
 thirty years, and the improvement in standards of editing, have made the original 
 compilation quite out of date. 
 
 3. PERIOD FROM 1789 TO 1829. 
 
 For the period beginning in 1789 more remains to be done, though here also 
 materials have been published with much amplitude. For the doings of the execu 
 tive and legislative departments of the Government, we have the Messages and 
 Papers of the Presidents, in many ways unsatisfactory, but not likely soon to be 
 reprinted, the Journals of the Senate and House of Representatives, the Executive 
 Journals of the Senate, the Annals of Congress and its continuation the Register 
 of Debates, and the mass of papers, partly of legislative and partly of executive 
 origin, embraced in the great folio series of the American State Papers. We also 
 have editions of the Writings of Washington, John Adams, Jefferson, Madison, 
 Monroe, Franklin, Hamilton, Jay, Gallatin, King, Calhoun, Clay, and Webster, and 
 are promised those of R. H. Lee and the correspondence of Marshall. Among 
 
13 
 
 writings of statesmen, the great desideratum is an edition of the correspondence of 
 John Adams (little was printed in his Works) and of John Quincy Adams. Great 
 abundance has been preserved by the family in both cases; it is earnestly to be 
 hoped that we may some time have ample publication. The correspondence of John 
 Adams, Marshall, James A. Bayard, and the Federal Pinckneys would be of great 
 value in enabling us to understand the major portion of the Federalist part} , as 
 distinguished from the Hamiltonian wing, now so much better known. 
 
 The first three volumes of the Executive Journals of the Senate, covering the 
 period 1789-1829, were published many years ago (1829) in a comparatively small 
 edition, and are not easy to procure. The historical importance of these journals, 
 exhibiting the action of the Senate on all appointments and on all treaties, is very 
 great. In view of this and of the large editions of public documents commonly 
 issued, it is very unfortunate that the next 13 volumes, extending to 1869 and pub 
 lished in 1887, were printed in only 100 copies, and that volumes 17 to 29, covering 
 the years 1869-1891 and published in 1901, were printed in an edition of only 250. 
 The result is that full sets of the Executive Journals of the Senate can not now be 
 completed for less than $250. But it is probably too soon to suggest an immediate 
 reissue, unless the electrotype plates from Volume IV on are still in existence. 
 
 Debates. The records of debates in the earlier Congresses, as comprised in the 
 Annals of Congress, leave much to be desired. It is not probable that we could 
 much improve on the Register of Debates for the ensuing period, 1825-1837. Gales 
 & Seaton, the publishers of the Register, finding that venture successful, proceeded 
 in 1834 to begin the filling of the gap from 1/89 by the preparation and issue of the 
 Annals of Congress, which was completed to 1824 in 42 volumes. From October, 
 1800, when their newspaper, the National Intelligencer, was founded, they seem 
 to have relied entirel} on the excellent reports which had appeared in its columns. 
 During those years that newspaper had acquired such a reputation as a standard 
 reporter of Congressional proceedings that, until the contrary is shown, we may 
 assume that nothing better can be done than to leave the Annals in its present posi- 
 ti(3n of accepted authority for the debates of 1800-1824. For the debates of the 
 House from its beginning in 1789 to March 8, 1790, the Annals merely copies 
 Thomas Lloyd s Congressional Register (New York, 1789-1790, 4 volumes), whose 
 shorthand reports are ample and can not be bettered. The same is true for the 
 House debate on Jay s treaty in March and April, 1796, when the compilers could 
 copy from the two volumes (Philadelphia, 1796) in which that debate was fully 
 reported. But for other parts of the period from March, 1790, to May, 1800, it is 
 much less true. For those years, with the exception named, Joseph Gales compiled 
 his record from the files of New York and Philadelphia newspapers. Whether 
 further use of newspapers of the time would add much is not yet known. Mean 
 while it is impossible to recommend anything else, so far as House debates are 
 concerned, than that we should rest content with what is given us in the Annals. 
 
 It is impossible to accept with equal contentment our situation with respect to 
 the earlier years discussions in the Senate. From April, 1789, to February 20, 1794, 
 and, indeed, with a single brief exception, till December n, 1795, the Senate sat with 
 closed doors. The newspapers contained no report of its debates. The Annals have 
 
14 
 
 only matter derived from the Journals. With very slight exceptions, our onlv 
 knowledge of debates in the Senate during these years is derived from the record of 
 them kept during two sessions (April 24, 1789, to March 3, 1791) by Senator William 
 Maclay, of Pennsylvania, whose Sketches of Debate (Harrisburg, 1880; New York, 
 1890) give us only a partial and partisan view. It is unfortunate that we have 
 nothing better, and for the next few years nothing at all. Attempts should be made 
 to glean and publish all other existing diaries or records. 
 
 State Trials. But in the field of the judiciary it is possible to suggest a publica 
 tion (not confined, it is true, to the years 1783-1829) which would be of great use not 
 only to historical scholars but to lawyers and public men a collection of the State 
 Trials analogous to the English series known b} that name. All who have used the 
 latter know how important and interesting it is to Bnglish constitutional and political 
 history. The term "state trials" not having an exact legal significance, a series so 
 entitled might be given various extents. But it should certainly include (i) all trials 
 of impeachments (seven in number) before the United States Senate, (2) all important 
 cases in the United States courts in which men were tried for offenses against the 
 Government or against public peace and order (e. g., the sedition trials, Burr, 
 Vallandigham, Surratt), and (3) all treason trials in the courts of the States. 
 
 Of the trials included in these three classes very few are in the most generally 
 accessible body of judicial reports, those of the Supreme Court of the United States; 
 and indeed it is usually the reports of the trials in the courts of first instance that 
 are most interesting to the student of history. Most of the state trials exist only in 
 separate books or pamphlets so hard to procure that very few historical scholars can 
 hope to possess, or even to have near them, so complete a collection as is above 
 suggested. 
 
 Probably, however, we ought to adopt a broader construction of the phrase " state 
 trials," and to include the most important impeachment trials in the States; prosecu 
 tions related to international politics, like those of Smith and Ogden in the Miranda 
 affair, or McLeod in that of the Caroline; cases involving the fundamental relations 
 of state and nation, like that of Gen. Michael Bright in 1809 or Garland s case in 
 1867; cases of civilians tried by military tribunals, like Milligan s case; and the 
 various fugitive-slave cases Amistad, Prigg, Sims, Burns, etc. After including all 
 that is important of such material the bulk of the proposed collection would probably 
 not be greater than 25 octavo volumes. The advice of representatives of the Federal 
 judiciary and of the bar should be invoked in shaping and executing such a series. 
 
 4. PERIOD FROM 1829 TO l86l. 
 
 Printed materials. The material now available in print for this portion of our 
 constitutional and political history is extensive and various. First in importance 
 among printed sources are the reports of debates in Congress, which from 1825 to 
 1837 are to be found in Gales & Seaton s Register of Debates, and from 1833 to 1873 
 in the 108 volumes of the Congressional Globe. These two series, though not very 
 conveniently arranged, are widely distributed in tolerably complete sets, and there is 
 no present need of reprints. 
 
15 
 
 The same thing may be said of the important judicial records; the decisions of 
 the Supreme Court are available in the original reports, in two private reprints, and 
 many of them in the condensed series of Curtis and Miller. The official Opinions of 
 the Attorneys-General of the United States are likewise sufficiently available. The 
 reports of the circuit and district courts during this period are also to be found in 
 the private publication known as Federal Cases, which is still in print. 
 
 The executive records of the period are on a different footing. Richardson s 
 Messages and Papers of the Presidents, indeed, though not satisfactory, will answer 
 for a time. But the communications of the heads of departments and their subordi 
 nates (and likewise the reports of the committees of the two Houses) are to be found 
 only in that reservoir of unorganized matter, the Congressional documents, which 
 make up some thousands of volumes, crudely arranged, and with some duplications 
 and no annual indexes. This series is arranged in eight subdivisions for each session 
 of Congress, namely, Senate Journals; Senate (Committee) Reports; Senate Docu 
 ments (or Senate Executive Documents); Senate Miscellaneous; House Journals; 
 House Reports; House Documents; House Miscellaneous. B. P. Poore s Descriptive 
 Catalogue of the Government Publications of the United States is a crude index to 
 this whole series down to iSSi, and the Government has also printed a list of these 
 publications, from the Fifteenth to the Fifty-second Congress, inclusive, under the 
 title "Tables of and Annotated Index to the Congressional Series of United States 
 Public Documents" (Washington, 1902). 
 
 In these documents of Congress is buried an immense mass of important 
 material on all fields of American history, such as committee reports on all the great 
 questions that have attracted the attention of Congress; memorials and proceedings 
 of commissions on state boundaries; petitions; reports on public works; economic 
 material, such as the reports on commerce and navigation, beginning in 1821; on 
 commercial relations, beginning in 1855; the census publications of 1830 to 1860; 
 reports on agriculture, beginning in 1841; reports of the Commissioner of Pensions; 
 of the Patent Office, beginning in 1837; f the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 
 beginning in 1825; an d, f course, the reports of the heads of the great executive 
 departments. No material casts more light on the actual workings of the Federal 
 Government and the growth of an administrative system; but few libraries have 
 unbroken sets covering the whole period from 1829 to 1861, and it is now very 
 difficult to make up anything like a complete series. 
 
 Manuscript materials. Some materials of the same nature as those printed in the 
 Congressional documents, particularly reports of committees, still remain in manu 
 script. Among such materials listed in the Van Tyne and Leland Guide to the 
 Archives, the more important are correspondence and rulings on public lands and 
 laud grants; military and naval reports and correspondence; controversies with the 
 States and correspondence thereon. But the most important documents still 
 remaining imprinted are of two classes the papers of Presidents and other public 
 men, especially those now in the Library of Congress, and diplomatic correspondence 
 and records. The latter are dealt with in a subsequent section of this report. 
 
 The Government possesses papers of Andrew Jackson, Martin Van Buren, 
 James K. Polk, Franklin Pierce, Jefferson Davis, Daniel Webster, Thomas Corwin, 
 
i6 
 
 and Salmon P. Chase. In general these collections have no such fullness and 
 importance as those of the older generation of American statesmen; and the most 
 important document of all, the Polk Diary, is not in the possession of the Government. 
 
 From the last edition of the Van Tyne and Leland Guide to the Archives it 
 appears that there are enormous files of correspondence and orders in the Navy and 
 War Departments, some of which must certainly have historical significance, and 
 very little of which has ever been printed. Similar series of letters can be found in 
 the Treasury Department (especially a file of letters from the Secretary to the Presi 
 dent), in the Indian Office, and in the Land Office. The documents relating to 
 the intercourse between the Federal Government and the territorial officials have 
 been very little used as yet by historians. In many fields it is evident that the 
 archives of the Government abound in unprinted material, examination of which 
 will be necessary for the future historian. 
 
 Writings of statesmen. One of the most obvious undertakings for this period is 
 to make public, as has been done so largely for the preceding period, the letters and 
 other writings of the group of statesmen \vhose activity falls chiefly between 1829 
 and 1861. The need of doing this in the case of John Quincy Adams has already 
 been mentioned. The Library of Congress possesses ample materials for doing it in 
 the case of Jackson. A collection of his correspondence would be of the highest 
 importance and interest, and is strongly to be recommended for early publication. 
 Van Buren could next be undertaken, though with means less complete. The 
 Webster, Corwin, Polk, Pierce, Davis, and Chase papers now in the Library of 
 Congress are not so strong in letters of the men themselves as in letters to them. 
 But many more of the former could usually be obtained from other sources for such 
 publications. Furthermore, many of these collections are rich in letters to statesmen 
 of a kind which constitutes one of the most important types of historical sources, 
 namely, the confidential and personal statements of men on the inside of public life; 
 and selections of the letters written to the statesman in question should always be 
 included in any publication of his correspondence. As to extent, from two to five 
 octavo volumes would apparently be necessary for the writings and correspondence 
 of each of the statesmen above named a somewhat greater number in the cases of 
 Jackson and Van Buren. 
 
 Reprints from the Congressional documents. Of material already printed which 
 ought to appear in more accessible form, the Congressional documents furnish a great 
 reservoir. Leaving out of account as already available the Messages and Papers of 
 the Presidents and the annual reports of the heads of the offices as too bulky for 
 reprint, in view of the fact that a good many copies of them are disseminated through 
 the country, what is most needed is a reprint of the most valuable of the occasional 
 publications. Of such documents many are of great significance, such as general 
 reports and correspondence on internal improvements (leaving out of consideration 
 the numerous bulky reports on particular public works), on the various phases of 
 Indian affairs, on contested state boundaries, and on the administration of the public 
 lands. In any such work search should also be made among the reports and corre 
 spondence which remain in manuscript, but which may now be of importance. 
 
 But such a series can not be satisfactorily considered in the field of constitutional 
 and political history alone. Materials on the other phases of American history 
 
embraced in this report lie in similar abundance in these Congressional documents, 
 and call for similar treatment. The most convenient method would be to make up a 
 great series on the general plan of the American State Papers. That notable collec 
 tion, which did so much credit to its makers and has been so immensely useful to 
 historical writers, covers the period from 1789 to 1829 i n 3^ folio volumes, arranged 
 in series, as follows: Foreign Relations, 1789-1828 (6 volumes); Indian Affairs, 1789- 
 1827 ( 2 volumes); Finance, 1789-1828 (5 volumes); Commerce and Navigation, 
 1789-1823 (2 volumes); Military Affairs, 1789-1838 (7 volumes); Naval Affairs, 
 17941836 (4 volumes); Post-Office Department, 1790-1833 (i volume); Public Lands, 
 1789-1837 (8 volumes); Claims, 1790-1823 (2 volumes); Miscellaneous, 1789-1823 
 (2 volumes). 
 
 In recommending strongly the inception of a great series of National State 
 Papers which should continue to 1861 and eventually to later dates the good work 
 done for the earlier period by the American State Papers, we should expect that 
 nearly all the categories of the earlier series should be retained, and that the most 
 important of the Congressional and Executive documents of the years 1829 to J 86i 
 relating to Foreign Relations, Military Affairs, Naval Affairs, Indians, Finance, 
 Commerce and Navigation, and Public Lands should be collected into series bearing 
 those designations. Several of these subdivisions can be appropriately considered at 
 greater length in later sections of this report. But while describing at this point in 
 its entire scope the project which we recommend, a project much exceeding the 
 bounds of a merely constitutional and political history, we wish further to emphasize 
 the fact that it ought also to be so shaped as greatly to exceed the categories deemed 
 appropriate eighty years ago. Time has enlarged the scope of the Federal Govern 
 ment and its interests, and the scheme of series should be widened to correspond. 
 The growth of our industrial organization and of our system of transportation, and 
 the creation of the Department of Commerce and Labor and that of Agriculture, are 
 illustrations of what is meant. The great series recommended should have, in order 
 to meet the historical needs of the present time, besides the older categories, its sections 
 devoted to Geographical Papers, to Agriculture and other extractive industries, to 
 Manufactures, to Labor and Industrial Organization, to Population and Social Organi 
 zation, and, to return to constitutional history, a series embracing the governmental 
 papers on State Boundaries and Federal Relations with the States and Territories. 
 
 In such series should be embraced not alone the Congressional documents but a 
 comprehensive body of selections from the departmental correspondence at Wash 
 ington, with special reference to the letters exchanged with the President, the heads 
 of other departments, and the chairmen of the chief committees of Congress. The 
 immense value of such material is apparent to any intelligent reader of Van Tyne 
 and Leland s account of the Treasury Department (pp. 59 et seq.), the Interior 
 Department (pp. 201 et seq.), and the Department of Justice (pp. 138 et seq.). It is 
 indispensable to a clear understanding of the actual working of our Government. It 
 would on the one hand throw light on the obscure places in the origin of many poli 
 cies and many laws, and it would on the other hand make accessible the means of 
 understanding the real relations of executive and legislature in our system. 
 
 6542009 3 
 
i8 
 
 To this comprehensive project of National State Papers we recur in later sec 
 tions, the diplomatic series being one especially worthy of early attention and capable 
 of being so worked out as to serve as a model for the others. We feel sure that a 
 reasonably uniform plan would be of advantage to all the series, and therefore have 
 suggested a general title and organization. Its magnitude can not be estimated 
 without further and detailed research. Perhaps -indeed the most convenient method 
 would be to fix upon a certain number of volumes and then select material to fill 
 them. The American State Papers, covering about forty years, from 1789 to 1828, 
 is in 38 volumes. A similar compilation for the next thirty-two years, with regard 
 to the large stores of manuscript material, would be cramped in 60 volumes of the 
 same size as its predecessor, or a hundred volumes of more easily manageable 
 dimensions. 
 
 But the execution of this project would extend over many years; the present 
 concern is to plan deliberately and with a sufficiently wide outlook. 
 
 5. PERIOD FROM 1 86 1 TO 1 908. 
 
 Under this heading we consider the political and constitutional material relating 
 particularly to the civil war and reconstruction, practically not going beyond 1885. 
 
 As compared with the -extraordinary completeness with which the military 
 records of the war have been gathered into serviceable forms, the neglect of the 
 political and constitutional records is astonishing. McPherson s unofficial compila 
 tion, History of the Rebellion, now antiquated and out of print, is practically the only 
 collection that can be depended upon for the documentary history of so important a 
 policy, for example, as that of emancipation and abolition. Great quantities of 
 additional matter are scattered through the documents printed by Congress, and a 
 certain amount comes incidentally within the scope of the Official Records of the 
 War. The works of Lincoln, Chase, Seward, Sumner, and others contain much 
 valuable matter, and doubtless there is more in manuscript in some of the executive 
 departments. We should recommend, first, a collection on 
 
 Emancipation and Abolition. This should embrace legislative, executive, and 
 judicial papers. The legislative should include the acts of Congress and of state 
 legislatures, reports of committees, and some bills. The executive should include 
 the official orders and recommendations of the President and the heads of depart 
 ments, with selections from the interdepartmental correspondence. The judicial 
 should include a chronological list of the federal cases, with the leading opinions in 
 full and the remainder in summary. With the series might properly be included 
 the important portion of the "Slave Trade and Colonization Papers," from 1854 to 
 1872, preserved in the Department of the Interior and described by Van Tyne and 
 Leland (p. 202). 
 
 Confiscation. This subject overlaps in some measure that just considered, and 
 should be treated on the whole in the same manner. The bulk of the material would 
 greatly exceed that touching Emancipation and Abolition. For the latter, two or 
 three volumes might suffice; for Confiscation at least double that number would be 
 necessary. 
 
Confederate Archives. Great masses of Confederate archives are preserved in the 
 Treasury and War Departments and the Library of Congress. Of these the Jour 
 nals of the Confederate Congress, in 7 volumes, have been printed by the United 
 States Government as a Senate document, and the Messages and Papers of the Con 
 federate President, with most of the diplomatic correspondence, have been published 
 by J. D. Richardson, as a private enterprise, in 2 volumes. The distinctively military 
 and naval papers have been exhaustively exploited for the great series of Official 
 Records of the War. There remains a great collection of matter in which is 
 embedded the detailed history of the Confederate administration in its financial, 
 postal, and judicial aspects. That the printing of much of this matter is of the 
 utmost importance to historical knowledge goes without saying. In just what form 
 or order and on just what scale the enterprise should be undertaken are questions 
 that can not be answered without a more exact knowledge of the contents of the 
 Confederate archives than is derivable from Van Tyne and Leland. 
 
 Reconstruction. The official documentary materials relating specifically to the 
 problems and processes of Reconstruction have for the most part been printed. They 
 are in the reports of the military commanders in the South or in those of the 
 numerous investigations instituted by the two Houses of Congress ; but while the 
 quantity of printed material is very great it is scattered and hard to use, and might 
 well be segregated and reproduced in. a series of volumes expressing a coherent 
 system. Such a series might begin with the general and comprehensive documents 
 e. g., the records of the Freedmen s Bureau, the report of the Joint Committee on 
 Reconstruction and that of the Joint Committee on the late Insurrectionary States, 
 and the records of the five military districts created by the act of March 2, 1867. 
 After such general matter, the series should present, State by State, the various 
 executive and Congressional documents in their proper order and relations, with 
 additional material from manuscript. 
 
 Whether as an appendix to such a series or in independent form, the complex 
 mass of Congressional documents relating to the disputed Presidential election of 
 1876-77 should be reproduced. 
 
 Unofficial Papers. The printing of a couple of volumes of wisely selected 
 documents from the papers of Andrew Johnson, preserved in the Division of Manu 
 scripts in the Library of Congress, would be as great a service to historical science, 
 for the period of 1861-1875, as could be suggested under this head. Selections from 
 the papers of Chase, Holt, Trumbull, and E. B. Washburne in the same collection 
 would have a similar value. 
 
 H. FINANCIAL AND COMMERCIAL HISTORY. 
 
 In the history of the finances and commerce of the United States the Govern 
 ment has done little toward preparing- adequate presentations beyond statistical 
 material, of which it has published much, but usually in an indigested form, and 
 as called for by a special condition or emergency. The printed "sources" of this 
 history are the same as belong to other subjects of administration, e. g., those 
 embraced in the American State Papers. The imprinted material consists of the 
 correspondence of the Treasury Department with its different agents throughout 
 
20 
 
 the country, and special reports on certain subjects, prepared for the information of 
 the Department and not submitted to Congress, nor published unless specifically 
 called for by either House of Congress. The files of the Department are not com 
 plete, and from various causes material has been lost or destroyed. 
 
 In the destruction of papers the want of system pursued has been obvious. No 
 one trained in history or connected with a collecting body like the Library of Con 
 gress has been detailed to examine the papers designated for destruction, with a view 
 to retaining what is possessed of a historical character, and the existing files of the 
 different departments are not as a rule subject to a custodian who has either the 
 historical knowledge or the historical instinct. 
 
 In the American State Papers are the messages of the Presidents, the " Finance 
 official reports and statements, reports of committees of Congress, and memorials and 
 petitions addressed to Congress on financial and commercial subjects up to the first 
 session of the Twentieth Congress (Alay, 1828). While imperfect as to the earlier 
 Congresses, this compilation is the fullest and most comprehensive in intention yet 
 undertaken by the Government, but it is not as comprehensive as the subjects merit, 
 and the form and arrangement leave much to be desired. Many papers are included 
 which need not be reprinted, for their interest is not permanent and the published 
 lists of the public documents make them accessible. It also includes many state 
 papers of the highest importance, which could be again issued in more convenient 
 form and with such editing and annotation as their value in history demands. Of a 
 like character are 2 volumes on "Commerce and Navigation" and i volume on 
 "Claims" in this series, both of which classes are carried out to 1823, under the same 
 limitations as the "Finance" volumes. 
 
 Apart from this publication, what the Government has already done in this par 
 ticular line has been largely called out for a special purpose and in connection with a 
 particular measure. We have in niind only the more important of these publications ; 
 for a vast quantity of compilation has been performed by bureaus or individuals and 
 printed by one House or the other of Congress, of little or no permanent value and 
 involving a great waste of time and money. The unequal merit of this output makes 
 it difficult to decide how far the entire field has adequately been covered. 
 
 Departmental regulations. Laws are general in their description of functions 
 and duties, and as a consequence there grows up in each department an amount of 
 administrative rules and regulations which is essential to a proper interpretation of 
 the results. Much of these regulations may be obsolete from the administrative 
 standpoint, and so far as the Treasury is concerned it is doubtful if that Department 
 even possesses a complete file of the circulars issued from its various divisions. A 
 great deal of what is regarded as obsolete has distinct historical value. It represents 
 the official interpretation of a law, and this interpretation has not infrequent^ been 
 modified or set aside by a judicial interpretation when matters in dispute have been 
 brought to a higher court. These regulations prescribe the rules and forms for 
 keeping books and accounts, for making returns to the central bureau or Department, 
 and embody administrative features or inside machinery of the Department. They 
 frequently contain references to current political events which make it necessary to 
 suspend old, or introduce new, methods. We need only instance the days of the 
 
21 
 
 embargo, a period of war with a foreign country, the operations of the various national 
 banks, and the questions involved in the civil war, to indicate how important these 
 often temporary regulations may be. 
 
 We do not know of any partial compilation of this material , and a publication 
 would involve a selection according to subject or according to the periods of time. 
 Tariff, internal taxation, navigation laws, governmental currency, and public loans 
 would be among the more important financial subjects. The framing of tariff laws, 
 the enforcement of embargoes or trade restrictions, the interpretation of the various 
 tariffs, and the operations of national banks and subtreasury would lend themselves 
 to a treatment by periods of time. Only an examination of the material could 
 enable a judgment to be formed, which method would be the better, but it may be 
 easily seen that if a continuation of the American State Papers were contemplated 
 there is abundance of valuable new material for the series on "Finance." 
 
 As to the debates of Congress and the larger number of Congressional docu 
 ments, a series of references to the more important discussions on finance, and a note 
 to an important report or paper giving the dates of discussion and action taken in 
 both Houses, would be sufficient. 
 
 Private papers. The material contained in private papers can hardly be 
 neglected in compilations on economic subjects, and especially when these papers 
 are in the possession of the Government. It is only necessary to name the series of 
 the Papers of the Presidents in the Library of Congress to indicate the importance 
 of their contents Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Jackson, Polk, Pierce, 
 and Johnson. To these should be added the Robert Morris, Hamilton, Gallatin, and 
 Corwin papers. Xot only do they often give the exchange of notes on financial and 
 commercial propositions, but they are rich in correspondence on these subjects with 
 leading authorities in the States. To carry out the plan consistentl} , reference 
 should be had to published papers, biographies, and memorials of those who had 
 an important part in framing important financial measures, or who had gained 
 reputation in executing them. As instances of such material may be named the 
 biographies of Morris, Hamilton, Gallatin, A. J. Dallas, Van Buren, Chase, and 
 Fessenden; and the memoirs of McCulloch, Boutwell, and Sherman. This material 
 is constantly growing in bulk and in importance. A judicious selection from the 
 different collections would be of advantage. 
 
 Reports of the Secretaries of the Treasury. The most important compilation 
 for financial history should be that of the reports of the Secretary of the Treasury. 
 In 1837-1851 a partial compilation of the reports was made and printed in 6 volumes. 
 Not only is it very incomplete, but it is a mere compilation to 1849. ^ or ^ s tne 
 publication in the American State Papers an}* more satisfactor\-, though much fuller, 
 and embodying all the then known communications from the Secretary of the 
 Treasury to Congress down to 1828. In the new compilation, which might come 
 down to 1865, or even to 1879 (the one being the end of the war, the other being the 
 resumption of specie payments), there should be references to other documents and 
 reports, illustrative notes, and a careful editing-out of what was merel} 7 formal, 
 temporary, and nonessential. Such a compilation would not require more than 6 or 7 
 volumes, and would naturally form the great source of information on the finances. 
 
 6542009 4 
 
22 
 
 Other desirable compilations of State Papers on special topics would include : 
 
 (a) The finances of the War of Independence. 
 
 (b) The Holland loans. 
 
 (c) War finance, 1812-1816, 1846-1848, 1861-1865. 
 
 (d) Tariff legislation. A compilation of the laws, made by R. G. Proctor, was 
 published in 1898, but a new compilation should contain references to memorials 
 and petitions, debates in Congress, and special reports on the subject. A legislative 
 history of each tariff act would be valuable. 
 
 (e) Banks national. 
 
 (/") Coinage, and bullion production and movement. 
 
 (g] Currency, treasury notes, greenbacks (legal tenders). 
 
 At least one volume would be required for each of these subjects, and this limit 
 would be exceeded in three of the items. The exact number of volumes would 
 depend upon the plan of editing. 
 
 Foreign commerce. The materials for a history of the foreign commerce of the 
 United States exist in large quantities and almost entirely in manuscript form. We 
 know of no recent compilation which gives the full text of commercial treaties and 
 reciprocity agreements, with such correspondence as led to the framing of the con 
 tract and the legislative action involved. It is true the influence of treaties of 
 commerce has been strongly felt only in comparatively recent years, the formal and 
 limited commercial treaty of the past affording safeguard to trader and merchandise 
 in foreign countries. But the consular correspondence in the Department of State 
 is a rich mine of material relating to commercial relations with other countries since 
 1789, and is a mine as yet untouched. These relations were often diplomatic as well 
 as commercial, and would thus fall more properly in the diplomatic section. But in 
 themselves they would give a full picture of the treatment accorded to American 
 commerce throughout the world, and trace from the colonial beginnings the growth 
 of over-sea trade and the upbuilding of an export trade that has always been essential 
 to American economic development. Unfortunately the papers of the different 
 customs houses, which could supplement this consular correspondence, have been 
 for the most part destroyed. 
 
 The trade of the great rivers and the general movement, inward and outward, 
 demands something more than the mere figures, and the additional facts could only 
 be obtained from the original papers. The perfunctory compilations of trade returns, 
 which prevailed before 1867, and which have been printed in various places, are not 
 sufficient for historical purposes; and the destruction in large part of the original 
 returns makes it impossible to complete the record. 
 
 On commerce and commercial relations may be suggested the following com 
 pilations: 
 
 Consular reports from 1 789 to be selected. 
 
 Commercial treaties and reciprocal agreements. 
 
 Special reports by experts on commercial conditions. 
 
 It is impossible to estimate the number of volumes needed, as the material is 
 now in more than one department. 
 
23 
 
 Internal commerce. The American State Papers, Finance, contains some sta 
 tistical material for internal commerce, extending to 1828. The Treasury Depart 
 ment s series of Reports on Internal Commerce begins in 1876; the reports of the 
 Interstate Commerce Commission in 1887. The Monthly Summary of Commerce 
 and Finance adds new material and regroups it for historical use. More recently 
 the divisions of the Department of Commerce and Labor, especially the various 
 branches which deal with navigation, steamboat inspection, light-houses, coast and 
 geodetic survey, the census, and statistics, make reports which show what could be 
 done in constructing an historical series to serve as the preface to these later publica 
 tions. The secondary authorities, using state as well as federal material, should be 
 utilized in presenting the material for early periods. Newspapers would yield sup 
 plementary data. Moreover, there are archives not yet exploited, such as the manu 
 script collections of the collector of the port of Xew Orleans, recently saved from 
 destruction and now preserved in the Library of Congress, w r hich furnish much 
 original material for the history of the commerce of the Mississippi Valley before the 
 days of the railroad. 
 
 C. ECONOMIC AXD SOCIAL HISTORY. 
 
 The field of economic and social history, outside of finance and commerce, is one 
 of peculiar difficult} , due to its extent, to the comparatively recent recognition of the 
 importance of the economic and social aspects of American history, to the recent date 
 of establishment of various governmental bureaus dealing with the divisions of the 
 field of this report, and consequently to the lack of federal archival material upon 
 some of them. Yet it must be remembered that the United States has been prima 
 rily a peaceful nation, and that its contributions to history lie in the field of indus 
 trial and social development quite as much as in that of political institutions, and 
 much more than in the field of war or foreign relations; and it is also to be observed 
 that the movement, the whole world over, toward a deeper study of economic and 
 social history, is likely to manifest itself, indeed is already manifesting itself, in the 
 United States. It is so important to promote an understanding of the present United 
 States through a stud}- of the most significant documents illustrating its development 
 that a committee which aims at looking well forward into the future need not hesitate 
 to set forth ideals which are not capable of immediate realization. Our statement of 
 ideals will be followed by a view of what is most practicable and advisable for present 
 work, shaped in accord with the proposal, made on a previous page, of a continuation 
 of the American State Papers. 
 
 The ideal. Hitherto the United States Government has confined itself to the 
 publication of materials in its own possession. But in many fields of economic and 
 social history the maintenance of this restriction would result in a most partial and 
 misleading presentation of the facts which historians seek. Prior to recent activity 
 in collecting and publishing certain sorts of data. e. g., on labor and on agriculture, 
 federal material is lacking. In several such fields no really instructive bodies of 
 data can be set before the reader without at least laying under contribution the 
 materials, in manuscript and in print, oftentimes rare, possessed by the States. 
 Furthermore, though some objections arise against going outside the bounds of official 
 documents, federal or state, there are some subjects whose adequate illustration 
 
24 
 
 requires resort to private materials. We believe that the United States Government 
 should soon organize its historical work in such a shape as to employ trained inves 
 tigators in collecting as well as selecting material. The French Government s 
 Commission on the Economic History of the French Revolution (a most important 
 body, whose work is described by P. Caron in the American Historical Review for 
 April, 1908), includes such search among its functions. 
 
 Meanwhile in the United States a great amount of such collecting is being done 
 by the Department of Economic Research in the Carnegie Institution of Washing 
 ton, and by the American Bureau of Industrial Research, at Madison, Wis. The 
 former will print many materials in its Contributions to the Economic History of 
 the United States. The latter has devoted itself with great success to the collection 
 of original material relating to industrial history, especially that of labor movements, 
 and to the judicious selection of portions for publication. Thus, it has ready a 
 volume of documents, collected from all kinds of sources, showing the typical features 
 of the antebellum southern plantation and of industrial societv on the frontier; 
 another composed of the original reports, etc., of the early labor conspiracy cases 
 down to the first great labor movement of 1836, and others exhibiting the organiza 
 tion and actions of labor unions, employers associations, and workingmen s parties 
 in that and subsequent eras. The work of these two bodies shows the practicability, 
 tinder proper expert control, of such collection and organization of material as that 
 which we have declared to be in some fields desirable. 
 
 In the framing and conduct of any such ideal scheme an important question 
 would be that of the reprinting of what is already in print. It is much more 
 important to print that which has never been printed before. Yet the mass of the 
 printed public documents of the United States is so unwieldy, and to many investi 
 gators so inaccessible, as to make it difficult to use them for purposes of indus 
 trial history. Though there is at least one good collection of the Congressional 
 series in almost every State, there will always be a use for more manageable series 
 in which the cream of the material valuable for history has been set aside. If in 
 one somewhat voluminous collection we could have such a selection of documents as 
 this, along with references to the complete series and skillfully compressed statistical 
 matter, and the best of the additions that could be made from federal, state, and 
 private manuscript, the gain to vital history would be very great. 
 
 Suggestions for the present. But without expecting the immediate realization 
 of all these hopes, we are earnest in urging that in any large project of government 
 historical publication, such as that continuation of the American State Papers which 
 we have recommended, a liberal and modern view be maintained toward those aspects 
 of national development which found no recognized place in the old collection. Prac 
 tical considerations may seem to require that such a continuation should be mostly 
 made up of federal official documents rather than those of state or private origin, of 
 manuscript or rare print rather than of the easily accessible, and of papers bearing 
 date subsequent to about 1829. Bu t it would be a harmful pedantry and an unwise 
 economy which would hold rigidly to either of these three criteria. Some documents 
 anterior to 1789 will deserve inclusion, even though in 1829 they seemed unimpor 
 tant; some that are already accessible in print will need to be inserted in order to 
 
25 
 
 have them at hand for comparison with fresh material; and if relative completeness 
 requires the insertion of some papers not actualty possessed by the Federal Govern 
 ment, they should not be excluded. We proceed to some description of the various 
 proposed series old series continued or new. 
 
 NATIONAL STATE PAPERS. 
 
 Geography. The history of a new country plainly calls for such a subdivision. 
 The series would naturally include unpublished or rare reports of exploration or 
 selections from them, topographical surveys which might be used for historical pur 
 poses, and especially selections from surveys undertaken to prepare the way for 
 internal improvements. Obviously purely technical details should be omitted. The 
 earliest important exploring expedition overland, that of Lewis and Clark, has been 
 given so complete a documentary publication by a private enterprise under the 
 editorship of Dr. R. G. Thwaites that nothing remains for the Government to do in 
 this connection, but there are other explorations for which material doubtless exists 
 which should be examined with a view to publication. Possibly some portions of 
 the reports of explorations for the Pacific railroads might be republished for the light 
 cast upon early conditions in the trans-Mississippi half of the country. Van Tyne 
 and Leland (p. 203) note certain letters on this subject which should be examined. 
 Other material for the series could probably be derived from the files of the Coast 
 and Geodetic Survey in the Department of Commerce and Labor, the Bureau of Soils 
 and the Biological Survey in the Department of Agriculture, and the Topographical 
 Bureau in the War Department. 
 
 Lauds. There is no subject more fundamental in American history than that 
 of the public lands. Donaldson s The Public Domain (Washington, 1884) needs 
 revision and continuation. This might well take the form of a continuation of the 
 Public Land series of the American State Papers, w T ith fundamental documents, 
 and analysis and condensation of statistics; maps showing the successive stages of 
 survey and opening of lands to settlement; documents illustrating corruption, drawn 
 from testimony in cases, etc.; leading opinions, departmental and judicial; data 
 exhibiting in brief the processes of transfer to States, from States to corporations and 
 individuals, and from railroads to European and American settlers; selected colonial 
 and State laws which will show the origins of the federal system ; and, since American 
 democracy is largely to be explained in terms of land tenure, some materials illus 
 trating the general conditions of landholding in other areas than that of the federal 
 domain. Van Tyne and Leland s Guide, especially pages 219-225, shows what a 
 mass of material is to be considered and the need, visible in many fields, of expert 
 departmental advice upon plans for its exploitation. 
 
 Agriculture. The annual reports on agriculture began in 1841; prior to 1862 
 they were printed as part of the report of the Commissioner of Patents. The Depart 
 ment of Agriculture, from the time of its establishment, has printed much, and there 
 are indexes to its publications from 1841 down. But for the earlier period, and for 
 the significant features of the history of American agriculture, the student must use 
 state agricultural society and departmental reports, periodicals, and descriptions b}* 
 travelers and others, such as the ancnymcus American Husbandry (London, 1775) 
 
26 
 
 md J. F. W. Johnston s Notes on North America (1851). Particularly this dearth 
 exists prior to about 1840, but in many respects much later. Inasmuch as agricul- 
 :ure has been the dominant industry of the greater part of the United States through 
 nost of its history, it is desirable that collections should be made from such sources 
 is those just mentioned and that a series should be published, gathering together the 
 nost fundamental accounts of American agriculture and exhibiting the changes and 
 migration of its principal crops by such documents and by compendious statistics. 
 Many phases of American social and political history find their explanation in agri 
 cultural changes. The place of cotton cultivation in American economic and political 
 ife is a sufficient illustration; but the statistics of wheat cultivation by periods and 
 -egions would also throw much light on national history. The development of agri 
 cultural machinery, the changes in methods of production in general, the relation of 
 igriculture to transportation and currency problems, and similar topics should be 
 Included. Like reasons call for the inclusion in such a series of analogous data of the 
 earlier period respecting animal industry, the history of the forests and the timber 
 Industry, and of fisheries and mining. 
 
 Manufactures. Probably the census is a sufficient historical publication from 
 1850. Despite the imperfection of previous censuses, it may be found that enough 
 material exists in accessible print to illustrate sufficiently the development of nianu- 
 : actures from the end of the American State Papers, Finance, 1828 to 1850. 
 
 Labor and industrial organization, Here the case is like that of agriculture. 
 The reports of the Commissioner of Labor begin in 1886, and these and the Bulletins 
 are a mine of material from that date. But for the earlier period there is need of 
 documentary collection and publication. There are some Congressional committee 
 reports available, such as data in connection with tariff, panics, etc. The most strik 
 ing illustration of what can be done by well-conducted collection of documents on the 
 history of a given labor topic is E. Stewart, Early Organizations of Printers, Bureau 
 af Labor Bulletin 61. It collects documents from all sources, selects the more 
 important, and furnishes brief introductions. The work of the American Bureau of 
 Industrial Research, mentioned in a previous paragraph, shows the practicability of a 
 series which shall rest upon unofficial sources and treat the period neglected by the 
 Government. The development of business organizations, corporations, etc., stands 
 on the same basis. 
 
 Transportation and Post-Office. It would be well to continue to the end of the 
 civil war period the publication in compact form of documents bearing on the Post- 
 Office similar to those found in the volume of the American State Papers devoted 
 to that subject. They cast much light on the economic growth and social develop 
 ment of the country, and would be valuable in many branches of historical work. 
 But the immense development of transportation since 1829 makes it even more 
 desirable to furnish documentary material respecting it, especially in its earlier stages. 
 Select documents illustrating plans and legislation for internal improvement, the 
 early development of steamboat navigation, of railroad building, chartering, state and 
 federal regulation, railroad consolidation, and the rise of the transcontinental systems 
 could be so brought together as to have great value. 
 
27 
 
 Indians and negroes. The series of the American State Papers devoted to Indian 
 affairs should be continued on similar lines. There is likewise. need of collected 
 documents relating to the negro and the actual economic workings of the institution 
 of slavery. Other subjects of population and social organization are susceptible of 
 similar treatment, but can not at present be satisfactorily developed. 
 
 D. DIPLOMATIC HISTORY. 
 
 Existing printed collections. For the period 1775-1783 we have Sparks s 
 Diplomatic Correspondence of the American Revolution and Wharton s Revolutionary 
 Diplomatic Correspondence, a fairly satisfactory collection. For the next period we 
 have the Diplomatic Correspondence of * 1783-1789, seventy-five years old 
 
 and far from complete, though it contains nearly all that the Government possesses. 
 The American State Papers, Foreign Relations, cover the period from 1789 to 1828 
 after a fashion, but are nearly confined to correspondence sent to the Senate from 
 which the Senate had removed the injunction of secrecy. A careful estimate, based 
 on many days of painstaking inspection by a member of this committee, is to the 
 effect that while about one-half of the existing manuscript diplomatic correspondence 
 of these forty years consists of material that ought now to be in print, only about 
 one-fourth is actually to be found in the volumes of the series named. Between 
 1828 and 1860 there is no single series of volumes containing the diplomatic corre 
 spondence or other materials on our diplomatic history. The documents are found 
 in the series of Congressional documents under differing titles. Few libraries have 
 them all, and they are so scattered as to be hard to use. Moreover,, they embrace 
 isolated, selected papers, such as it suited the President or the Secretary of State to 
 send to Congress. From 1861 we have the annual issue, in general one volume 
 each year, of papers relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. 
 
 The period from 7775 to 1783. We have for this period documentary collections 
 that are fairly satisfactory, but at some future time the situation might be improved. 
 In one important particular the character of this period would justify an enlarge 
 ment of the scope of diplomatic publication which could hardly be defended for the 
 period subsequent to 1783. After that date it would not be prudent to recommend 
 the inclusion of large masses of material from foreign archives. However desirable 
 it may be to exhibit the "other side" of diplomatic controversies and actions, it 
 would be felt that, in the main, it is for foreign governments to publish their own 
 archive material. The exceptions should be limited to a small number of significant 
 documents necessary for the elucidation of American materials. But this limitation 
 hardly applies to the period ending with the treaties of 1783, the period in which the 
 United States was struggling for independence through a war involving several other 
 countries and through negotiations which can not be followed save by using the 
 archives of all these lands, yet which were of vital importance to the establishment 
 of this nation. Such conditions will some time be held to justify a monumental 
 edition of the diplomatic papers of the Revolution, an edition which would include 
 the thousands of documents that are to be found in the European archives. The 
 archives of Spain, though of intense interest, are almost untouched. From the French 
 archives we have not obtained much save what Doniol has permitted us to have in 
 
28 
 
 his Histoire de la Participation de la France a 1 Etablissement des Etats-Unis d Ame- 
 rique (Paris, 1886-1900). Stevens s Index in the Library of Congress would indicate 
 the amount and the situs of all the material English, French, Spanish, or Dutch. 
 A part of it is already possessed by the Government in the form of transcripts, the 
 extensive collection of so-called Peace Transcripts at the Library of Congress. The 
 American material is, of course, in Washington, either among the Papers of the 
 Continental Congress at the Library of Congress or in that section of those papers 
 which, was retained at the Department of State, in accordance with the executive order 
 for the transfer, because of its relation to our diplomacy. 
 
 The period fro:n 1783 to 1789. The volumes printed seventy-five years ago, as 
 mentioned above, were fairly well prepared and printed, except for an inconvenient 
 arrangement. Though they are not procurable with ease, a new edition is not now 
 an imperative need. Some time we should have a more thorough presentation of the 
 American correspondence of the period which would also give at least the dispatches 
 of the foreign ministers in this country to their home governments. There exists, 
 in private hands in America, the Gardoqui correspondence, which would be of very 
 great interest and service. The American Historical Review contains the corre 
 spondence of the Comte de Moustier with the Comte de Montmorin, 1787-1789. 
 
 The period from //c?p to 1828. In most fields we have recommended that the 
 American State Papers be simply continued from 1829, with such modifications of 
 plan as later developments have made appropriate, but without much effort to go 
 back beyond that date. But in diplomatic matters it is impossible to be content with 
 what has been done in the earlier papers. Whereas the selection of material for the 
 other series of that great work was effected by its editors, using their own judgment, 
 generally sound, as to what was historically most important in the great masses 
 which lay before them, the material in the "Foreign Relations" series represents in 
 the main no principle of selection but the accident of communication to the Senate 
 and the official s judgment as to what it was expedient to make public at the time. 
 The papers thus printed are by no means in all instances the most important; fre 
 quently delicate and significant subjects are omitted from the special line of dispatches 
 or instructions; often the most valuable and illuminating portions of particular 
 documents are omitted and the less useful portions are printed. It appears, then, 
 that we should have in print the diplomatic correspondence for this period ( 1 789- 
 1828), and the only proper method is to disregard the folio edition of the American 
 State Papers, to reprint what appears there and to add other material ; this additional 
 material ma}- make the whole, as has been intimated, twice as great in quantity as it 
 now is. 
 
 If the estimate approaches accuracy, it should be possible, with judicious editing, 
 to print the diplomatic correspondence and other closely related material throwing 
 light upon our diplomatic history to 1828 in 12 or 13 volumes like those of the 
 American State Papers. Unimportant documents could be calendared and very unim 
 portant ones only listed. 
 
 The period from 1828 to 1861 . It is when we enter the period after the ending 
 of the American State Papers, however, that we encounter the need that is most 
 evident and imperative. From 1828 to the outbreak of the civil war, a time of great 
 activity in foreign affairs, the diplomatic correspondence was printed in the regular 
 
29 
 
 Congressional series of publications, generally among the House or Senate executive 
 documents. There were some four hundred such publications, relating to diplomatic 
 affairs, in the period from 1829 to 1861, besides the diplomatic materials which the 
 President, after 1833, frequently appended to his annual message; but the manu 
 script materials are still more ample. Now that the United States has become more 
 deeply interested than ever before in its own diplomacy and the progressive develop 
 ment of its foreign relations, it would be of very great service to all students of history, 
 to the workers in the Department of State and the diplomatic and consular service, 
 and to other persons interested in practical political affairs to have the diplomatic 
 correspondence of this and the preceding period properly arranged and published in a 
 new series, " National State Papers, Foreign Relations, 1789-1861." One might hope 
 that discreet editing would bring all the important material for the later period w r ithin 
 the compass of 20 such folio volumes as those of the American State Papers. We 
 believe that, of all the subdivisions of the proposed National State Papers, this is the 
 one that could best be taken up first. 
 
 E. MILITARY HISTORY. 
 
 In the portion of its work relating to materials for military history, the committee 
 has been great!} aided by a detailed memorandum kindly supplied by Maj. Gen. 
 F. C. Ainsworth, Adjutant-General of the United States Army. 
 
 Leaving out of account all records relating to the personnel of the regular and 
 volunteer armies, and taking up first of all the material relating to military operations, 
 we consider only military archives of such general historical interest or value that, 
 if they have not been heretofore satisfactorily printed, they should be made accessible 
 to historians and investigators generally by publication. The records to which 
 special interest attaches are those of (a) the Revolutionary war, (b) the war of 1812, 
 (c) the war with Mexico, (d) the civil war, (e) the war with Spain, and, in a somewhat 
 lesser degree, (f) the several Indian wars and (g] the Philippine insurrection. 
 
 Many of the official reports and much of the correspondence relating to military 
 operations during those periods have been printed at some time in the Annual 
 Reports of the War Department, in the series of Congressional documents, or in 
 other government publications. The publications in which historical data relative 
 to military operations during the later wars are to be found can be pointed out 
 readily ; but for the earlier wars the finding of such publications is a more difficult 
 task, because of the incompleteness and the imperfect cataloguing of those 
 publications. 
 
 Practically all reports and correspondence on file in the War Department having 
 general historical interest or value relative to the Philippine insurrection of 1899- 
 1902 have been printed in the Annual Reports of the War Department for those 
 years, with supplementary matter in other Congressional documents easily found in 
 the catalogues of public documents and accessible in many libraries. The same is 
 true of the war with Spain in 1898, while all such material, Union or Confederate, 
 relative to the civil war has been printed in the Official Records of the Union and 
 Confederate Armies, disseminated to the extent of 11,000 copies. Nothing more 
 could be recommended in respect to any of these. 
 
30 
 
 War with Mexico. The reports of the Secretary of War for 1847 contain reports 
 and some correspondence; more is to be found in other Congressional documents, 
 especially Senate documents and House executive documents of the first session of 
 the Thirtieth Congress. But these government publications containing the military 
 records of the Mexican war are so disconnected and some of them so difficult to find 
 that it is believed the}- should be reprinted, together with any heretofore imprinted 
 historical military archives of that war that may be found. The Military Secretary 
 (now the Adjutant-General) of the Army, in his Annual Report for 1906, reported 
 that the collection of military records of this war, now in the possession of the War 
 Department, was as complete as it could be made, that it would make about 6 volumes 
 of 1,000 pages each, of the same general s.tyle as the Official Records of the Civil 
 \Var, costing about $11,000 each for printing and binding, and that the series could 
 be made ready in a very short time after such publication was authorized by Con 
 gress. It was his belief, and it is that of this committee, "that the first action with a 
 view to the publishing of the War" Department archives should be directed to the 
 printing of the Mexican war records. 
 
 The war of 1812 and Indian wars. The published military archives of the war 
 of 1812 are more incomplete than those of the more recent wars, but some military 
 correspondence and reports relative to it are printed in the American State Papers, 
 Military Affairs, in Brannan s Official Letters, in the Public Papers of Daniel D. 
 Tompkins, and in The War, Niles s Register, and other periodical publications of the 
 time. Historical data with regard to military operations during the Indian wars 
 prior to 1838 are to be found in the American State Papers, Military Affairs, and (to 
 1827) Indian Affairs, while material relative to many later Indian wars is to be found 
 in the Annual Reports of the Secretary of War. All these publications are incom 
 plete and fragmentary. While the Government possesses a great mass of manuscript 
 material relating to these wars, so much of what is necessary to complete the records 
 remains in the hands of States, historical societies, or private individuals that the first 
 work must properly be one of collection or copying of outlying records. The mass of 
 what is now in hand would make fewer volumes than in the case of the Mexican war, 
 but printing should be postponed until the Government s materials are more 
 complete. 
 
 Revolitiionary war. The same is even more true of the War for Independence, 
 the military record of which is now only partially covered by Force s American 
 Archives and many state publications. Acts of Congress approved July 27, 1892, 
 and August 18, 1894, provided that all military records of the Revolution and the 
 war of 1812 then in any other of the executive departments should be transferred 
 to the War Department and there properly indexed and arranged for use. Fourteen 
 years have passed since the second of these enactments. Under existing conditions 
 at the War Department, their effect has been to make these materials entirely 
 inaccessible to historians, as may be seen by a perusal of the regulations of 1897, 
 printed in Van Tyne and Leland (pp. 110-113) and still in force. Those regula 
 tions provide for proper supply of information to persons seeking pensions or 
 admissions to " patriotic-hereditary societies," but close the archives of the War 
 Department absolutely to American historical investigators. Meanwhile, such 
 
records of the Revolutionary war as are possessed by the Department have been 
 indexed and arranged for use, but the collection is so incomplete that no one could 
 advise its publication as a whole. Certain series, such as the general orders of 
 General Washington, could be published complete at present. But for anything 
 analogous to what has been done for the civil war and is proposed for the Mexican 
 war, a publication embracing reports and correspondence in as complete extent as 
 possible, further copying and collection is desirable before printing. We speak only 
 of materials respecting military operations; in the publication of muster rolls and 
 the like this committee as such has of course 110 interest. 
 
 In military history, as in diplomatic history, impartial historical writing demands 
 that one should not confine himself to the witness borne by one combatant only. 
 The true historian will wish to hear, the other side and as completely as possible. 
 Without use of the archives of Great Britain, France, Mexico, and Spain our gov 
 ernment historical publications will have an ex parte character, much to be regretted. 
 That the deficiency should be supplied by ( those countries is not to be expected, since 
 to Great Britain, France, and Spain in particular these wars have been but episodes 
 relatively brief in the long centuries of their history. If it is not to be expected that 
 publication of foreign papers on these w r ars should be undertaken in full extent by 
 the United States Government, at least the editors of our military-historical volumes 
 should have the opportunity to study the relevant materials in foreign archives and 
 to incorporate in their volumes some of the most significant papers thence derived. 
 
 It is not to be forgotten, however, that the military archives of the United States 
 contain much else than simply the records of its military operations. The army was 
 so largely the advance guard of American civilization in its westward march across 
 the Continent that the archives contain a great wealth of material for the understand 
 ing of pioneer conditions and the earl}- history of all parts of the United States but 
 the Atlantic seaboard. Surveys, explorations, early routes of transportation, rela 
 tions with the Indians, the founding of forts and military posts out of which cities 
 have grown, all receive so copious illustration from these archives that it would be a 
 narrow-minded policy to confine publication from them to papers of purely military 
 interest. They have a large part in all work upon our social history. 
 
 F. NAVAL HISTORY. 
 
 Printed documents respecting our naval history are chiefly to be found in 
 Force s American Archives, The American State Papers, Naval Affairs, the British 
 Naval Chronicle (1798-1818), Brannan s Official Letters ( 1823), Goldsborough s Naval 
 Chronicle (1824), Niles s Register, the Canadian Archive Reports, Cruikshank s 
 Documentary History of the Campaigns upon the Niagara Frontier, the annual and 
 occasional reports of the Secretary of the Navy, Reports and Dispatches (1849), an( ^ 
 the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies, now in course of publica 
 tion by the Government. But other very important documents must often be sought 
 in places widely scattered. The court of inquiry asked by Commander Elliott, in 
 1815, upon his conduct on Lake Erie, is printed in one unofficial work; Perry s 
 voluminous specifications against him, in 1818, in another neither by the Govern 
 ment; both are necessary to the historian. The British minister, Mr. Foster, wrote 
 
to Monroe reams upon the questions then pending between the United States and 
 Great Britain; but a document printed in the life of the Marquis of Wellesley, his 
 Instructions to Foster, sets forth the British position on the continental system with 
 a succinctness, logic, and force nowhere else to be found. 
 
 Further publication should for the present be confined to the military activities 
 of the Navy, to the postponement of civil and administrative papers. In view of the 
 extensive publication of naval records concerning the civil war, now proceeding, we 
 see no reason for recommendation, unless it be that the " Letters from Foreign 
 Consuls" (United States consuls abroad) mentioned in Van Tyne and Leland (pp. 190, 
 item 26), should be printed. They touch on the blockade and kindred matters, and 
 the blockade was one of the most important military measures of that war. The 
 letters referred to represent in a degree its external aspect. 
 
 From the brief duration and limited action of the war of 1898 with Spain and 
 from the voluminous publication already made we infer that the greater part of 
 the documents are already in print, though at some time a fuller publication of 
 telegrams may be desired, since the part which the cable played in this war was 
 exceptionally great. 
 
 Turning to the earlier naval conflicts, it is profitable to remark that there are in 
 every war conspicuous features which should in part determine the course and nature 
 of research. Thus, in the war of 1812, we have, first, the prevalence of battles be 
 tween single ships, owing to the vast inferiority of American naval strength; second, 
 owing to the same cause, the completeness of the blockade of the American coasts, 
 producing an exhaustion of means in the midst of plenty, a financial catastrophe, 
 which compelled peace without obtaining the formal concession of any one of the 
 points for which the nation went to war; third, the fact that naval preponderance on 
 the Great Lakes, whether established by victories, as on Brie and Champlain, or held 
 in uncertain balance by a cautious policy of shipbuilding, as on Ontario, protected 
 the northern border of the United States and rendered fruitless the British land 
 operations in that region. Now, whenever it is possible to recognize beforehand such 
 determining features, a clue is placed in the hands of the searcher of archives as to 
 what is comparatively important to print. 
 
 Revolutionary war. The United States Navy, despite the brilliant actions of 
 Paul Jones and one or two others, exercised no effect upon the outcome of the war, 
 except upon Lake Champlain, in 1776. The American control of that lake in that 
 year postponed the British invasion to 1777, entailing thus the decisive consequences 
 of Saratoga and its sequel in the French alliance. The documentary history of the 
 operations on Lake Champlain, therefore, deserves fuller treatment, in which, 
 besides the papers already printed in the American Archives and elsewhere, attention 
 should be directed to additional papers possessed by the United States Government, 
 state governments, the British Public Record Office, and the Archives of War and 
 Marine, in Paris. In several other parts of the conflict land and naval operations 
 were so closely interwoven that the papers relating to them should be fused into one 
 whole. The actions of privateers were often brilliant, and in the mass they influenced 
 the result, but our Government has few of the necessary materials for their history, 
 and it is doubtful if the matter can be illustrated by any general documentary 
 publication. 
 
33 
 
 Tripolitan war. As the Barbary pirates were the immediate originating cause 
 of the United States Navy, the hostilities against them derive thence an interest to 
 our naval history quite beyond their petty scale or military value. To illustrate the 
 subject properly, it should be considered as a whole, from the depredations on 
 American shipping, immediately after our protection by the British navy ceased, 
 down to the conclusion of the peace of 1816. Documents should be selected to illus 
 trate the depredations, the tribute paid by us to the several Barbary powers, our 
 dependence on Portugal for protection, the dismay felt when Portugal made peace 
 with the pirates, the legislation authorizing a naval force, the actual hostilities, 
 including Decatur s action with the Algerine naval vessels in 1815. References, at 
 least, might well be inserted to the already printed debates of Congress touching the 
 institution of a navy; they are a part of naval history, broadly considered. 
 
 Closely allied with these topics is the general question of Mediterranean com 
 merce, and that of the gunboat system of Jefferson. It is probable that the 
 "Captains letters," "Commanders letters," etc., still mostly unprinted, would give 
 much incidental light upon Mediterranean trade and piratical depredations, from 
 which the Mediterranean littoral suffered much more than the United States ship 
 ping. It does hot appear that the gunboat system has ever been illustrated by 
 adequate and systematic publication. Yet, though utterly inconsequent in itself, 
 the system has historical importance, because, under Jefferson s influence, it stunted 
 the rising navy, and so at the least aided to bring on the war of 1812. 
 
 War of 1812. The documents printed in the American State Papers, Naval 
 Affairs, are incomplete and unsatisfactory from the historical point of view. The 
 series of "Letters received" and "Letters sent" in the Navy Department should be 
 carefully gone over for the years 1810-1816, inclusive, attention being specifically 
 directed upon (i) the single-ship actions, which have obtained in popular recognition 
 an esteem which we can not properly disregard; (2) upon reports of officers com 
 manding naval stations, as to the blockade, and operations of the enemy s vessels 
 on the coast, including especially all transactions in the Chesapeake; (3) upon the 
 general history of preparations and of action upon the Great Lakes. When army 
 and navy are both engaged, as in the Chesapeake and on the Lakes, military cor 
 respondence will sometimes contain an essential part of a common programme, or 
 one side of a dispute. Pertinent documents in Niles s Register and similar publica 
 tions, the originals of which are not in the files of the Department, should be either 
 included in the publication or adequately referred to. 
 
 The log books of United States vessels, where preserved, may furnish data of 
 importance, although log books of that day, British and American, are commonly 
 scanty in information. Court-martial records are far more valuable. The proceed 
 ings of the court held on the survivors of the Chesapeake have not been printed. 
 The same is true of the courts on the officers of the Gnerriere, Macedonian, and 
 Java, and those of the British squadrons defeated on lakes Erie and Champlain. 
 All these are very full and necessary to* any historian discussing the actions. The 
 instructions issued by the British Government to its officers, both military and naval, 
 seaboard and lake, are as essential to an understanding of operations as are those of 
 our own Government. 
 
34 
 
 War with Mexico. In the way of fighting, the Navy in its proper sphere had 
 little to do in this war, for there was no Mexican navy. But the transactions on 
 the west coast, having to do with the acquisition of the territory ceded by Mexico, 
 are of national importance. 
 
 In naval material the principle that it is not enough to consult the materials 
 possessed by one side is emphasized by the almost invariable naval practice of holding 
 a court-martial in any case of serious disaster. The result of this procedure is the 
 accumulation of a mass of sworn testimony by expert eyewitnesses. Few questions 
 are asked of victors ; they tell their story much as they will ; the vanquished must 
 furnish explanations, and at large. The beaten side thus furnishes the better field 
 for the historian. 
 
 SUMMARY OF CHIEF RECOMMENDATIONS. 
 
 The enterprises which in the course of the preceding survey have been recom 
 mended with most emphasis, and which we regard as having the leading claims for 
 early undertaking, are the following: 
 
 Commissions and Instructions to the Governors of the American Colonies. 
 
 State Trials. 
 
 Papers of Andrew Jackson. 
 
 National State Papers, continuing the old series of the American State Papers, 
 Foreign Relations, Finance, etc., and adding new series for Agriculture, Manufac 
 tures, Labor and Industrial Organization, Internal Commerce, etc. 
 
 Official Records of the War with Mexico. 
 
 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. 
 
 From the detailed survey which has preceded, it is obvious that we are still far 
 from having all the documents that we need for satisfactory dealing with the great 
 problems of American history. The gaps in its published records are many and 
 important. The sum total of the desiderata we have indicated is a formidable one, 
 involving voluminous publication, great editorial labors, and much expense. But we 
 can not too strongly insist that in bringing together the materials for a rational and 
 scientific programme we are not advocating the immediate execution of all its parts. 
 To attempt the whole at once, to attempt any part of it without deliberate considera 
 tion, in which should be invoked the judgment both of experts within the depart 
 ments and qualified historical scholars from without, would be to invite disaster. We 
 have endeavored to point out what needs to be done. It is 110 part of our purpose to 
 enlist the Government in extravagant schemes; our desire is rather to pave the way 
 to a procedure whereby, without greater expenditure upon documentary historical 
 publications than at present, a product may be secured which will meet more fully the 
 needs of the Government, of historians, and of the public, and be a source of credit to 
 the nation. It should be possible, with due regard to all these interests, to select, from 
 among the many enterprises that we have "signalized as desirable, those which call 
 most loudly for immediate execution. Such qualitative or comparative judgments 
 we have in many instances attempted to suggest, and in the last preceding section 
 have emphasized the projects we deem most important. The final determination as 
 
to what should come first we deem it expedient to leave to a permanent commission, 
 which we earnestly hope to see established. 
 
 A large part, if not all, of the hoped-for product could be, as we have said, 
 grouped under the general title "National State Papers," an extensive collection 
 embracing several series. According to our conception of such a collection, its 
 various series and volumes should follow a uniform plan. Editors chosen for their 
 special competence in the fields respectively covered should go over all the material, 
 printed and imprinted, domestic and foreign, possessed by the Federal Government 
 or not. They should then include or exclude documents deliberately, and in obedi 
 ence to principles carefully thought out in the case of each of these classes of mate 
 rial principles which have been suggested on previous pages of this report. They 
 might list with proper references many documents whose full texts thev deemed it 
 inexpedient to print. They should supply brief introductions to their volumes, and 
 such headnotes or footnotes to the individual documents as might seem requisite for 
 their identification, but no elaborate explanatory annotations. Their volumes should 
 be supplied with tables of contents, indexes, and typographical arrangements ensur 
 ing convenience in using the books. The noble series of the American State Papers 
 is evidence that seventy-five years ago the American Government appreciated abun 
 dantly the usefulness of historical material to the life of a young nation. The open 
 ing years of the twentieth century should see a revival of this solicitude on the part 
 of a nation much more mature and vastly more rich, but none the less in need of the 
 teachings of history. 
 
 We believe that in view of the intimate connection between archives and his 
 torical publications it is not stepping out of our province to request the earnest 
 attention of the Committee on Department Methods to the serious situation of the 
 Government in respect to the storage of its records and papers. Vast quantities of 
 material, some of it valuable historically, much of it worth great sums of money to 
 the Government, are annually "colonized out" by departments into outside buildings, 
 unsuitable and unsafe, and in which it is practically impossible to consult them. 
 This evil has been often commented on by careful heads of departments. We 
 strongly recommend, as the only remedy, that a National Archive House be built 
 and that the earlier records and papers of the administrative departments be segre 
 gated and stored in it, under modern and scientific arrangements, as soon as is pos 
 sible. We further recommend that Congress be requested so to modify its laws 
 respecting the destruction "of departmental papers as to insure that papers no longer 
 useful for administrative purposes be not destroyed without giving some expert per 
 son, such as the Chief of the Division of Manuscripts in the Library of Congress or 
 the head of the future archive establishment, the opportunity to preserve such as still 
 possess historical value. 
 
 But since no suitable and adequate system of management for the documentary 
 historical publications of the Government can be maintained without having a con 
 stant means of invoking the aid and counsel of those best qualified to judge, we 
 make it our chief recommendation that, the present temporary committee having 
 done what it could to point out needs and suggest general views and plans, Congress 
 be requested to provide for a permanent advisory Commission 011 National Historical 
 
36 
 
 Publications. We ask leave to make certain recommendations as to its organization 
 and procedure, based on the experience and practice of countries older than ours in 
 historical work. 
 
 SYSTEM PURSUED BY OTHER GOVERNMENTS. 
 
 In seeking for the ideal mode of governmental procedure in historical publica 
 tion, we can derive much instruction from the experience of Kuropean governments. 
 It can be conceded without shame that they have preceded us in this pathway, and 
 though much of their historical work lies in the medieval field, which has methods 
 peculiar to itself, much of it lies in the field of modern history and furnishes close 
 analogies to the tasks lying before us. They do not spend more for historical work 
 than we. Some years ago, when a systematic attempt was made to obtain figures 
 for thg comparison, they were spending considerably less. Great Britain was then 
 spending about $75,000 per annum for the preparation and printing of documentary 
 historical volumes; Russia about $50,000; France about $30,000; Germany and 
 Prussia, for preparation alone, not prints, about $23,000, while the United States, 
 then at the height of its expenditure for the Official Records of the War, was spend 
 ing in such ways more than $250,000. But the uniform impression of historical 
 scholars is that the European governments get a better and larger product for their 
 money. In part, this result is due to the lower rates prevailing in Europe for the 
 compensation of learned workers ; but in the main the superiority is due to a more 
 scientific organization. 
 
 What makes the experience of European governments the more instructive is 
 that at the beginning their course was marked by the same absence of plan which 
 has marked that of the United States Government to the present date. Volumes of 
 historical material were printed simply because some official or some private indi 
 vidual succeeded in persuading the legislature of the time to provide for them. 
 Their genesis and succession were casual, their execution good or bad, as the 
 consciences of editors might determine. 
 
 In general terms, it may be said that those nations which have emerged from 
 this unsatisfactory regime and developed an adequate mode of dealing with the 
 problem have done so by intrusting the planning of historical series and the super 
 vision of their execution to permanent special commissions of historical experts, 
 qualified to judge what materials, hitherto unpublished or imperfectly published, 
 would be most useful to the advancement of historical science. 
 
 The government which first adopted this plan was that of Great Britain, which, 
 by various commissions (1800-1837), kept in existence for many years a body of 
 officials and scholars charged with the execution of such enterprises of documentary 
 publication as they deemed most important. After bringing out a large number of 
 folio volumes, these commissions ceased to exist, and the later British series, the 
 Rolls Series, Calendars of State Papers, and other calendars, have been produced 
 under another system. For fifty years these publications have been nominally under 
 the charge of the master of the rolls, whose ancient title connects him with the 
 records, but who is really an equity judge. Practically the whole matter has usually 
 lain in the sole control of the deputy keeper of the public records, who has doubtless 
 
37 
 
 had the advice and aid of the assistant keepers. The system is not one to be 
 recommended, providing, as it does, no regular means for bringing to bear upon the 
 problems the opinions of historical scholars outside the archive staff. Its present 
 effect is the confinement of publication to calendars, lists, and indexes, a restriction 
 possible in a country where distances from the original manuscripts in the Public 
 Record Office are short, but inapplicable to the case of the United States. Better 
 models of organization and procedure are to be found on the Continent than in 
 England. It may be mentioned, however, that for one particular portion of its 
 publications Great Britain has an Historical Manuscripts Commission of thirteen, 
 several of whom are historians; and that the Canadian government in 1907 instituted 
 a similar but smaller commission, which is to plan and supervise the historical 
 publications of the Dominion quite after the manner usual on the Continent. 
 
 In 1834 Guizot, then Minister of Public Instruction in France, instituted what 
 has since been called the Committee of Historical Works, consisting at first of from 
 nine to eleven members, charged to direct the preparation and publication, for the 
 Government, of volumes of unpublished materials for the history of France. - More 
 than 250 volumes have been issued by the committee; the quality of the whole would 
 have been better if more pains and thought had been expended at the beginning in 
 framing a comprehensive and well-reasoned plan. In 1874 an additional commission, 
 Commission on Scientific and Literary Missions, was established under the same 
 ministry, with the object of searching for data historical, philological, etc. to be 
 found in foreign lands. In our country this function is mainly performed by the 
 Department of Historical Research in the Carnegie Institution of Washington. 
 Another special commission, whose operations more closely resemble what would be 
 appropriate to the circumstances of the United States Government, the Commission 
 for the Publication of Documents on the Economic History of the French Revolution, 
 has been fully described by one of its chief members, M. Pierre Caron, in an 
 instructive article in the American Historical Review for April, 1908. It was 
 established in 1903, and, on account of temporary circumstances, was given a separate 
 existence from the Committee of Historical Works. The commission consisted at 
 first of 28 members, and now consists of 45, but its work is mostly done by an execu 
 tive committee of 7, all of whom are noted historical scholars. It has formed 
 subsidiary committees in each department of France, and has furnished them from 
 time to time with instructions which are models of the kind. It has shown great 
 activity, and has published rapidly, perhaps too rapidly, a large series of octavo 
 volumes, about 10 volumes per annum. 
 
 In the same year (1834) in which Guizot s original committee was appointed, 
 the new Kingdom of Belgium established a Royal Commission of History, which, 
 with somewhat widened functions, subsists to the present day, and has performed 
 notable services in publication. Perhaps, however, the most famous of such commis 
 sions is that which in 1858, at the instance of Ranke, Sybel, and Waitz, King Maxi 
 milian II, of Bavaria, established in connection with the Bavarian Academy/ To 
 
 ""A French cooperative historical enterprise." 
 
 *Its history is related in Die Historische Commission bei der koniglich bayerischen Akademie 
 der Wissenschaften (Munich, 1883). 
 
this commission we owe more than a hundred volumes of the best-edited historical 
 material that Germany has produced. 
 
 Commissions of this form have come more and more into favor in the German 
 states, and have increased rapidly in recent years. A particularly successful one 
 was established in Baden in 1883. Wiirttemberg founded one in 1891, the province 
 of Styria in 1892, the Kingdom of Saxony in 1896, the Prussian provinces of West 
 phalia, Nassau, Hesse, and Saxony in 1896-1898. With these, with the commissions 
 more recently established by the Thuringian states, Alsace, and Lorraine, and with 
 the very active Commission for the Modern History of Austria, founded in 1901, 
 one ma}- fairly say that such commissions have become the accepted mode in the 
 country in which the editing of historical documents has received its most scholarly 
 development. 
 
 Hungary also has a historical commission of the same nature. Russia has 
 both the Commission for Printing Letters Patent and Treaties, founded in 1811, and 
 the Archseographical Commission, of broader scope, founded in 1834. Italy has had, 
 since 1883, in the Italian Historical Institute, an organization designed both to 
 supervise the collection entitled "Sources for the History of Italy" and to act as 
 a clearing house for the provincial historical societies and commissions. 
 
 But perhaps the best model of such national commissions is furnished by that 
 which the Queen of the Netherlands instituted in 1902, consisting of ten eminent 
 historical scholars and entitled Commission of Advice for National Historical 
 Publications. Warned "by the experience of some commissions previously established 
 in other countries, this Dutch commission proceeded, before engaging in any scheme 
 of publication or definitely resolving upon them, first to make a general survey of 
 the different periods and parts of Dutch history, with an eye to the question, What 
 serious gaps existed in the documentation that could be filled by the publication of 
 materials hitherto imprinted? They brought out a careful and detailed report 
 entitled "Survey of the Gaps in Dutch History to be filled by Documentary 
 Publications." The}- decided which of the various projects should be taken up 
 first. Continuing in office as a permanent committee of advice, they framed 
 singularly judicious regulations for the execution of such works regulations from 
 which much could profitably be borrowed for American use and they have produced 
 several excellent volumes in their projected series. 
 
 In the composition of such commissions as those which have been described 
 above as the usual machinery of governmental historical work in Hurope the 
 European governments have often taken advantage of the existence of national his 
 torical institutions, associations, or academies, especially in those countries in which 
 national academies have a large share in the general control of intellectual interests. 
 Thus the directing committee of the Monumenta Germaniae Historica, the chief series 
 for German medieval history, consists of nine members, appointed by the royal 
 academies of Berlin, Vienna, and Munich. The Royal Historical Commission of Bel 
 gium is chosen on nominations by the Belgian Academy from among its own mem 
 bers. Of the Munich Historical Commission, three members must by statute be 
 
 " Overzicht van de door Bruunenpublicatie aan te vullen Leemten der Nederlandsche Geschied- 
 kennis (Hague, 1904); see American Historical Review, Vol. XI, p. 433. 
 
39 
 
 members of the Bavarian Academy, and in practice several others are. The commis 
 sions of the most recent model usually consist of an archive official or two, specially 
 competent in history, of historical professors in the universities, and of men promi 
 nent in the work of the chief historical organizations of the respective countries. In 
 the United States, which has no national academy of the historical and philological 
 sciences, the obvious analogue for such purposes is the American Historical Associa 
 tion, incorporated by act of Congress in terms inclusive of precisely such services. 
 
 It is also necessary to bear in mind the peculiarities of our archive system. 
 National archives have a natural history of their own. Their regular course of 
 development is to proceed from a state of things wherein each government office 
 keeps its own papers to one wherein all papers not recent and not needed in current 
 administrative work are concentrated in one great historical repository. Great 
 Britain, with its all-engrossing Public Record Office, and Belgium and the Nether 
 lands, so far as national, as distinct from old provincial, repositories are concerned, 
 stand at one end of the scale of development. The archives of Berlin are less 
 concentrated, those of Paris and Vienna, with their combination of national archives 
 and archives of ministries, represent a still lower stage of the normal progression, 
 while those of St. Petersburg are almost as much scattered as the British were before 
 the Public Record Office was created. Xow, readers of Van Tyne and Leland s Guide 
 to the Archives of the Government in Washington do not need to be told that the 
 archives of the United States stand at the foot of the scale in respect to concentration. 
 There is indeed only one instance (that of the Department of War) in which archives 
 embracing the papers of a whole department have been concentrated into one archive. 
 Each bureau, sometimes each subdivision of a bureau, preserves its own records ; 
 there are more than a hundred such repositories. While it is certain that the mere 
 exigencies of space in departmental buildings will before many 3 r ears lead to the 
 creation of a central depository of some sort, it is essential at present, in devising 
 plans for proper supervision of the Government s historical output, to have regard to 
 the fact of separate departmental control over most portions of the manuscript 
 material. It is also needful to bear in mind the utility, when so many of the pro 
 posed publications lie within the domain of a single executive department, of invok 
 ing in all such cases the expert aid of the department s own officials. 
 
 SUGGESTIONS FOR A PE,RMANE,NT COMMISSION ON NATIONAL HISTORICAL 
 
 PUBLICATIONS. 
 
 Composition. We recommend that Congress be requested to pass legislation in 
 accordance with which the President shall appoint from among the members of the 
 American Historical Association eight or nine persons of the highest standing for 
 scholarship and judgment in the field of United States history, to serve as a 
 Commission on National Historical Publications; and we suggest that the executive 
 council of the American Historical Association be requested, when vacancies occur, 
 to propose nominations for the action of the President. 
 
 We recommend that Congress be requested to make annual appropriations for 
 the work of compilation and printing sufficient to ensure the issue of at least 10 
 octavo volumes per annum of the publications which such Commission may recom 
 mend, or, upon an estimate, $100,000 per annum for compilation and printing. 
 
40 
 
 Meetings. Let it be provided that the Commission hold two stated meetings 
 each year in Washington, and other meetings when called by the chairman with the 
 approval of three other members; 
 
 That the members of the Commission receive such compensation as Congress 
 may think fit, and that a suitable appropriation be annually made to defray the 
 expenses incurred in attending their meetings and the clerical expenses necessarily 
 involved in their work; 
 
 That the Commission arrange its members into committees of three upon 
 materials possessed respectively by the executive departments and the Library of 
 Congress; and that in each department and the Library of Congress a committee of 
 three be appointed b}^ the head of the department or the Librarian of Congress to act, 
 under the conditions set forth herein, with the respective committees of three formed 
 by the proposed Commission. 
 
 Operations. Proposals for volumes or series of documentary historical materials 
 to be published by the Government should come before the Commission in one of two 
 ways (a) on the initiative of the Commission, or (/;) on the initiative of one of the 
 departments. Let it be provided that the following procedure obtain in these two 
 cases respectively: 
 
 (a) In the former case no proposal shall be considered at any meeting unless a 
 full explanation by its proposer, stating reasons, giving a plan, estimating the mag 
 nitude of the proposed undertaking, and suggesting an editor, shall have been trans 
 mitted to the chairman or secretary of the Commission two months before the meeting 
 and promptly distributed in duplicate to all the members. 
 
 If approved by a majority of the Commission, the proposal, if it relates to mate 
 rials possessed by one department or the Library of Congress, shall be referred to 
 the committee on that department, which shall call into consultation the committee 
 of three appointed as above in that department, or the Library of Congress. If, how 
 ever, the proposed volume or series would be composed of materials possessed by 
 several departments, the Commission may proceed to its preparation after such con 
 sultations with those departments as may seem appropriate. 
 
 (/;) If from the committee of three formed as above in any department proposals 
 for such volumes or series of documentary historical materials shall be made to the 
 chairman of the Commission, he shall request details of a sort mentioned above, shall 
 send them, in duplicate to the members of the committee on that department, and 
 after one month shall call for their opinion, in writing, if there be question of one- 
 volume, or if a series of volumes is proposed shall refer the matter to a meeting of 
 the whole Commission. 
 
 No new publication of documentary historical materials shall be hereafter under 
 taken by any department or the Library of Congress unless the proposal has 
 received the approval of a majority of the editorial committee of that department or 
 of the Library of Congress, and of a majority of the appropriate committee of the 
 Commission. 
 
 The Commission shall make general regulations as to the form of publication 
 and the details of editing and execution, which rules shall be laid before the Presi 
 dent for his approval before going into effect; and shall report annually to the 
 President, in October. 
 
By some such plan as this we believe the Government can secure a steady 
 output of creditable historical work, based on competent and farseeing deliberation, 
 and answering the needs of the present and the future; and we do not believe that 
 such a product can be obtained without supervision of substantially the character 
 and extent that we have indicated. 
 
 In case it be deemed expedient to appeal to Congress for legislation enabling 
 procedure like that described above to be carried out, we submit herewith a draft of 
 a bill which embodies our views of what is essential in the constitution of such a 
 permanent commission : 
 
 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in 
 Congress assembled, That the President be authorized to appoint, with the advice and consent of 
 the Senate, from among the members of the American Historical Association, nine persons of the 
 highest standing for scholarship and judgment in the field of United States history, to serve as 
 a Commission on National Historical Publications, and to have authority to defray, out of such 
 appropriations as may be made to said Commission, the cost of preparing and printing such 
 volumes of material for American history as it may deem most useful. 
 
 Respectfully submitted. 
 
 WORTHINGTON C. FORD, Chairman, 
 CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, 
 CHARLES M. ANDREWS, 
 WILLIAM A. DUNNING, 
 ALBERT BUSHNELL HART, 
 ANDREW C. MCLAUGHLIN, 
 ALFRED T. MAHAN, 
 FREDERICK J. TURNER, 
 J. FRANKLIN JAMESON, Secretary, 
 Assistant Committee on the Doctimentary Historical Publications 
 
 of the United States Government. 
 
 The COMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENT METHODS. 
 
 O