course, as to many public events, be simply rumor run mad, unless corrected by official records, diplomatic correspondence, and other state papers which, until very recently, were regarded in all countries as the property of the monarch, and for reasons of state denied to the historian.* One can imagine the position of a writer who sat down to compose a work upon his own or any other country when such material was everywhere kept a secret.

The French Revolution, and the ideas which followed in its train, first developed the modern theory that official documents are for the public good, and that as to past events the public will be best served by being told the truth. How much has been brought to light since the archives of some of the old monarchies have been unlocked is a familiar story even to those acquainted only with the works of our own Prescott and Motley, who led the van in this department of investigation. But while France, Spain, Holland, and other countries have been aiding the historian, conservative England has been one of the last powers in Europe to open its records to the public, and even now has not done so fully. How this has affected American history can be readily understood.

In 1841, John Romeyn Brodhead was sent to Eu

*This theory and practice still prevail at Rome. The pope has always been the depositary of valuable state secrets. It is well known that in the archives of the Vatican repose documents which would solve many historical problems of great interest. If they are ever thrown open to examination, numerous points in history will doubtless have to be revised.

rope by the State of New York to procure copies of documents relating to its colonial history, from the public offices of England, France, and Holland. He went as an accredited agent from a friendly power, supported by all the influence of the general government. It was known that the State Paper Office of England contained a mass of correspondence of the royal governors, minutes of the Board of Trade, and other documents which would throw much light on early American affairs. In Holland were supposed to be valuable papers relating to the Dutch period, and in France. others connected with Canadian relations. Such proved to be the case, and in each of the latter countries the New York agent was treated with the greatest courtesy. He was allowed to examine all the colonial records, was aided in every manner, and furnished with copies of such documents as he selected.

In England he met with a very different reception. Lord Palmerston replied to his application to look over the colonial records by saying that if he would designate the particular paper which he wished to see, it would be officially examined, and then, if there were no objection, he could obtain a copy at the customary rates. As Mr. Brodhead knew nothing of the documents, and wished to look them over to find out which were valuable, this proposition of the noble Secretary was a virtual denial of his request. Thus matters stood for about a year, when a new Liberal ministry came into power. Under its regulations he was at length permitted to examine the original records, and was furnished with copies of such as he selected, although

annoyed by petty harassing restrictions, and charged exorbitant fees. There the theory still existed that such papers formed part of the monarch's private library, access to which could be obtained only through royal favor.*

Lest some uncharitable reader might suppose that this was exceptional treatment, extended to an American by his English cousins on account of their near relationship, let me cite another example. In 1844, C. M. Davies, an Englishwoman, published the last volume of a valuable history of Holland. In preparing her work she desired to consult the correspondence of the English ambassador at The Hague, from 1750 to 1780. This correspondence was kept in the same office with the papers relating to American affairs. The Englishwoman, less fortunate than the American, was not allowed to see the papers at all, and was compelled to send her book to press without their aid.†

The mission of Mr. Brodhead to Europe accomplished a great result. He brought back with him a large collection of documents relating to American history, many of which never before had seen the light. Those in French and Dutch were translated, and in 1856 the whole were published by the State in ten large volumes, entitled "Documents Relating to the Colonial History of New York." So far as public events are concerned, these are not rumors, but true material for

* See report of Mr. Brodhead, "Documents Relating to the Colonial History of New York," vol. i.

+ Davies's" Holland," iii. 607.

history. Their importance can be appreciated when we think of the material used by most historians before they were given to the world. In 1836, James Grahame, a Scotchman, published his "History of the United States," a pioneer work in Great Britain, and one which has been looked upon with considerable favor in New England. The author tells in the Preface how his volumes were compiled. He evidently never visited America, and never consulted an original document of any kind. He borrowed entirely from other books, mostly those published in New England; and even for them he had to go to Göttingen, in Germany, on account of the deficiencies of the British libraries.*

When Grahame wrote his book, very few persons in England or America knew or cared anything about foreign nations or their history. Davies's volumes on Holland had not appeared, and those of Motley were not yet thought of by their author. In France the documents were just coming to light which, within the past few years, have caused French early history to be rewritten, showing the character of the Huguenots who formed so large an element of our American population. It was at this same period that Bancroft wrote his first three volumes, which deal with our colonial history down to 1748. Composed under such condi

* See Preface, "Grahame's History of the United States," vol. i. + See Baird's "Rise of the Huguenots in France,” vol. i. Int. p. 5. Grahame's work was published in 1836; Bancroft's, vol. i. 1834; vol. ii. 1837 ; vol. iii. 1840. These closed the early period. Davies's “Holland,” vol. i., appeared in 1841, the "New York Colonial Docu

tions, and from such material, one need not wonder at the character of our early American histories. Written only from an English standpoint, that of neglect of everything not Anglo-Saxon in its origin, they would naturally be incomplete; but when we add the further fact that even the English material was largely inaccessible to the historian, nothing in the result will cause surprise.

In the half-century which has elapsed since the publication of Bancroft's third volume, bringing American history down to 1748, great advances have been made in the science of historical investigation. In addition, numberless documents have been discovered, apart from those relating to New York, which illuminate the whole period of the settlement of America and the making of the republic. Motley, Froude, Ranke, Masson, Gardiner, and a host of others have not only thrown much new light on the condition of England in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, but they have shown in various ways the close relations which existed between the English Puritans and their republican brethren in the Netherlands-relations which were little thought of fifty years ago. It would seem to be impossible for an unprejudiced reader even to glance over this modern historical literature without at least surmising that

ments" and Motley's "Dutch Republic" in 1856. Bancroft used many documents which he obtained for himself in Europe, but it never seemed to have occurred to him that the Netherland Republic might have exercised an influence on the early settlers of New England.