The History of Nevada, Colorado, and Wyoming, as already noticed, was written by Mrs. Victor, with the exception of the first two chapters on Nevada, which were by Bancroft. Mrs. Victor's statement of her work includes these also, perhaps by inadvertence. It is possible that she rewrote them, however, as Mr. Bancroft had admitted that they were out of proportion.

In the work on the Northwest Coast, we again see Bancroft's predilection for early voyages. The first half of Volume I, including the Spanish explorations of the coast, belonged to Oak's field, and was written by him. Bancroft wrote most of the remainder of the two volumes, which included the maritime fur trade, the Lewis and Clark expedition, the Astor enterprise, the Northwest and Hudson Bay companies, and the later American fur trade.

A hundred pages on the "Oregon Question" written by Mrs. Victor for Oregon were incorporated in the second volume of the History of the Northwest Coast. She had taken the American side of the case, a view with which Mr. Bancroft was not in sympathy. By his order, Mr. Oak rewrote the subject from an English standpoint. He added chapter fifteen, but to some extent made use of her work in preparing chapter sixteen. Mrs. Victor always claimed that he merely altered it, Oak himself that he rewrote it. The remainder of her ma.n.u.script was retained and printed as chapter eighteen.

The volume on Washington, Idaho, and Montana, was written wholly by Mrs. Victor, a task for which she was fitted by her work on early Oregon history.

The History of Oregon was also her work, a fact which has been known and fully recognized by prominent Oregonians since the day of its publication. She had contemplated writing such a work even before the beginning of Mr. Bancroft's project, and it was only a realization of her inability to compete single handed with the capital and other resources at his disposal which caused her to enter his employ. In collecting material within the state, she had the a.s.sistance of such pioneer families as her friends the Applegates and McBrides, and among others, of Judge Deady and Elwood Evans. Valuable data concerning Hudson Bay rule in Oregon were furnished her in a correspondence with Mr. A. B. Roberts and Mr. Allen, formerly of the Hudson Bay Company.

(This correspondence is now in the possession of Mr. E. H. Kilham, of Portland, Or.) The work as written made more than two volumes, and condensation was necessary. A chapter on geology and mining was omitted by Mr. Bancroft; the disposal of the ma.n.u.script on the "Oregon Question" has already been noticed, and matter on the San Juan boundary dispute and the Modoc war was also incorporated in other volumes. Mrs. Victor considered the first volume of the History of Oregon as perfect as it could be made at the time. With certain features of the second she was not so well satisfied, the most prominent being the omission of the history of the Oregon Steam Navigation Company, necessitated by Mr. Bancroft's failure to secure material, and certain changes made by him in her ma.n.u.script on Indian Wars in Southern Oregon in such a way as to throw blame upon the settlers (Mrs. Victor in [Salem] _Oregon Statesman_ February 24, 1895). It is worthy of note that her history is the first to pa.s.s over the political results attributed to Whitman's ride by previous writers. The sheets of the Oregon history before they were issued were submitted to Judge Deady for his approval.

In the half of the History of British Columbia which he wrote, Mr.

Bancroft utilized some of the material that he had collected in person. Bates prepared a fourth of the ma.n.u.script, and Nemos and Bowman together the remainder, Nemos writing some of the chapters and revising others.

The History of Alaska afforded Mr. Bancroft an opportunity for further research in the field of early voyages. He is credited with half of the volume, Bates with a third, Nemos a little, and Petroff about a fourth. Nemos places all of his own writing on this work and British Columbia together at a third of a volume.

A review of the facts shows that if we exclude the comparatively few interpolations and changes made by Mr. Bancroft, we can with a.s.surance declare the authorship of all portions of the third volume of Central America, of the volumes on California, and of those on the North Mexican States, Arizona and New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado, and Wyoming, the Northwest Coast, Oregon and Washington, Idaho and Montana, and that we can give in general terms, though without being able to locate the exact parts done by individuals, the names of the authors of two volumes of Central America, and all of Mexico, Utah, British Columbia, and Alaska. In these works Oak and Nemos were agreed that there were scattered fragmentary bits aggregating several volumes so worked over by different writers in different ways as to render it impossible to determine the exact authorship.

Turning to a consideration of the individual field of writing, we find that of the twenty-eight volumes of history proper, Bancroft is to be credited with four, no one entire, Oak with seven and a half, Nemos five, no one entire, Mrs. Victor a little less than five, Savage over three, Peatfield one and a half, princ.i.p.ally in small parts, and Bates one and a fourth. (This is a computation based exactly upon the facts as given, except in Bancroft's case.) Nemos upon the same basis makes the shares, except Savage's and Bancroft's, all slightly greater. He a.s.signs to Oak between seven and a half and seven and two thirds volumes, to himself and Mrs. Victor over five each, to Peatfield about two, and to Bates one and a half. An actual count of the parts of volumes written by Bancroft gives a total of three and a half, but Nemos said that he took four as the number upon the authority of Oak.

This would allow him a half volume of interpolations in the twenty-four and a half volumes done by others. Griffin, Petroff, Kuhn, and a man named Rasmus were the authors of fragments. Oak thought that the name was Erasmus, but said that Nemos who gave Rasmus was the better authority.

Concerning these facts in their main features, there is a complete agreement between Oak and Nemos, who together knew all the details which were to be known, and the evidence of the other writers fits exactly with their statements. The popular estimate of Hubert Howe Bancroft as the historian of the Pacific Coast, is founded upon the vague references and indefinite a.s.sertions of the Literary Industries within the pages of which there is nowhere to be found a straightforward statement that this man wrote more than a part of the works to which his name is attached. On the other hand, his own statements over his own signature admit that he did not pretend to be the author of what went out under his name. The ranking of Mr.

Bancroft among historians of the United States is, therefore, an error, and what has appeared in the public press concerning an "Historian of the Pacific Coast," and a "Macaulay of the West," is legend pure and simple. Instead of one Pacific Coast historian who wrote the Bancroft volumes, there were eight.

As to the six supplementary volumes of the "Works of Hubert Howe Bancroft," which ended the series, Mrs. Victor had some means of determining the authorship. According to her notes, Savage and Nemos did a great deal of writing and revising. The Modoc War in _inter pocula_, a part of the chapter ent.i.tled Some Indian Episodes, was written by Mrs. Victor from notes obtained by herself on the ground.

She also wrote some other matter for this volume. The remainder was done by Bancroft and his family, who also aided him much on Popular Tribunals.

Pastorals was produced chiefly by Bancroft. Of the Literary Industries, Nemos wrote several chapters or parts, Savage a little, and Oak three or four bits of a few paragraphs each. It must be remembered that Bancroft's writing in these private volumes was subjected to criticism, revision, and retouching by the best literary talent which the library afforded.

Concerning the Chronicles of the Builders, the biographical series which followed the histories, with such unfortunate results, some notes in Mrs. Victor's handwriting taken in 1888, about a year before work finally ended, give us the following facts: The introductory essay is by Nemos, as are also the reflective chapters and reviews, together with most of the historical text. Peatfield wrote Oregon, Washington, and Texas, though some of the latter was rewritten by Nemos. Mrs. Victor wrote "Routes and Transportation," and a number of the leading biographies, making nearly a volume. Savage wrote about a third of a volume.

Mr. Bancroft as a writer of history was subject to certain influences likely to be felt in his treatment of facts, which did not affect his coworkers. One great object was of course to make the work popular. It was with this end in view that much attention was given to literary finish and typographical features. It was his practice to have a writer employed for the purpose go over his own ma.n.u.scripts and sometimes those of his a.s.sistants to add "cla.s.sical allusions," as he termed them, for rhetorical effect. He himself was given to the reading of English cla.s.sics--Carlyle's works are especially mentioned by his friends--as a means of acquiring a good literary style. To stimulate the reader's attention, he occasionally made a side remark of such a ludicrous character as to be startling when one comes upon it in a perfectly serious paragraph. Mrs. Victor often laughed over the interlineation in a paragraph written by her on the Oregon boundary question of the words:

"Man is a preposterous pig; probably the greediest animal that crawls upon this planet": (Oregon, I, 592.)

In pa.s.sing upon the work of his corps of writers, one who combined the duties of financier as well as editor of the work either consciously or unconsciously must have been influenced by the question whether the treatment of the subject before him was such as would please the people in the locality whose history was being written. The Mormon turn given the History of Utah by the toning down of certain incidents which other historians have "shrunk from contemplating" occurs to us as a case in point: (Frances Fuller Victor in _Salt Lake Tribune_, April 14, 1893; _New York Mail and Express_, November 23d).

The publication of the Chronicles before all of the volumes of history were out could hardly have lessened this tendency, as a favorable mention of a man in the history would naturally tend to make him more approachable upon the subject of contributing to that work. Upon the back of the letter to Mrs. Victor instructing her to give prominence to certain dictations, which he admits are practically worthless, is written in her hand the legend, "Ways that are dark and tricks that are vain." As a result of complaint, changes were sometimes made in the text, even after the first edition was out: (Pamphlet, Proceedings of the Society of California Pioneers in Reference to the Histories of Hubert Howe Bancroft).

In the History of Montana occurs an example of a change made directly for business reasons. Several pioneers justly ent.i.tled to a place in the history of their territory disagreed with the agent of the Bancroft house concerning the number of volumes of the history which their contract required them to take. As a punishment for their refusal to comply with the demands of the publisher, their biographies were stricken from their place in the footnotes after the volume was set up, and other matter was subst.i.tuted. (The original sheets with marginal annotations as to amounts paid and biographies to be omitted are in the possession of Mr. E. H. Kilham of Portland, Oregon.) In view of these facts, we are forced to conclude that the business man in Mr. Bancroft, developed by the experiences and a.s.sociations of a lifetime, sometimes got the better of the historical editor of scarcely fifteen years' standing.

A second factor to be considered in Mr. Bancroft's writing was sometimes expressed by his acquaintances as a mistaking of contrariness for originality. As already indicated, his tendency is toward a form of writing such as will attract the reader's attention.

This tendency frequently a.s.serts itself in sweeping statements and striking characterizations, many of them apparently impelled by a desire to give a turn to an incident or an estimate of a character different from that given by any previous writer. Thus Bancroft wrote an estimate of General Grant, which was startling because of the general hostility of its tone, and was considered so unjust by Mrs.

Victor and Oak that they persuaded him to leave it out. (Letter of Mrs. Victor of July 25, 1892. The paragraph which was originally intended as a footnote in the History of Oregon, II, 246, is printed on page 18 of the Pamphlet of the Society of California Pioneers, which gives their proceedings with reference to Bancroft's histories.)

Again, in making an effort to avoid following Washington Irving, he has given in the part of the Northwest Coast which he wrote a treatment of the Astor enterprise, and an estimate of the character of Captain Bonneville, which later historians have shown to be prejudiced and in error. (See Chittenden's History of the American Fur Trade in the Far West, I, 432-33.)

A third influence affecting the treatment of facts of history which pa.s.sed under Mr. Bancroft's editorship, as well as those which he presented in the scattered portions of volumes of which he could claim real authorship, is that of personal bias. The manager of the Bancroft enterprise was a man, who in the course of a thirty years' business career had many business rivalries and personal enmities. His strong dislikes frequently a.s.sert themselves in his writings, if we are to take his own statements. (Lit. Ind., 374.)

Again, the personal equation must be accounted for in the value which he sets on the work of historians who wrote before him. He not infrequently disparages their writings in the strongest terms, his depreciation of Washington Irving being one of the most palpable cases. (Chittenden's History of American Fur Trade in the Far West, I, 244-46), has forcibly revealed the extent of the injustice done by Bancroft in this one case. That there are others like it will readily appear. For the effort to demonstrate the superiority of the Bancroft histories over others, we must accordingly make due allowance when attempting a critical estimate.

Furthermore, the editor-manager began the work with certain theories and notions of history that have found their way into the pages which he has published. From the beginning, he adopted the British side in dealing with the dispute over the Oregon boundary. In his treatment of Indian wars, the same tendency to adopt ready-made theories a.s.serted itself. In the ma.n.u.script of Mrs. Victor's History of Oregon, treating of Indian Wars in Southern Oregon which "gave great credit to the veterans of that struggle and the settlers generally for their forbearance," the editor interlined some expressions, throwing the blame upon the settlers. When it was pointed out to him that this was not true, he replied that he had begun his History of Central America with this theory of Indian wars, and must be consistent throughout the entire series (Communication of Frances Fuller Victor to the [Salem]

_Oregon Statesman_, February 24, 1895).

To such errors as those just enumerated the work of Mr. Bancroft's collaborators was not subject. The dislike inspired by some of the measures of their chief has sometimes resulted in their disparagement as historians by a public press, absolutely ignorant of the parts of the work for which they were responsible. (In the _Salt Lake Tribune_, February 16, 1893, is a very striking example. Occasional utterances of the San Francisco papers of about the same time follow along the same line.) It must be remembered that they were not only able and educated, but that the compet.i.tive wage system under which they worked offered every inducement to search for the truth and to make it known as they found it in the best collection of books, pamphlets, and newspapers on Pacific Coast history that was ever made. The only characteristics which were common to the library corps, as shown by a study of their biographies, were good education, ill health, and liberal religious views.

In general, these writers had special qualifications which adapted them for work in their respective fields. To Oak there was a fascination in the study of doc.u.ments from which the usually uninteresting and sometimes tedious details of events in Spanish and Mexican provincial localities were derived. His contributions to history he could honestly claim were better than other writings on the same subject because of the exhaustiveness of his research through the great amount of material at his disposal. While he admired the finer qualities of style in the writings of others, they were not required in his work. He frankly declared that he had little natural ability in this line, and in the writing of provincial annals found no opportunity for the cultivation of what he had. Oak once a.s.serted in a joking mood that he had found of great service a thorough knowledge of Spanish and French, together with a useful smattering of other languages, including English. None of his chapters were rewritten or even reread with a view to polish, for the reason that he believed his works had their chief value merely as records, and that an attempt to make them fascinating to general readers could but result in impairing their value for reference. The fact that the superintendent of literary activities in the Bancroft library was an enthusiast in original research who cared vastly more what was said than how it was said is a circ.u.mstance favoring the accuracy of the histories which must not be overlooked. Oak could say that from the first he had exercised an important influence in the direction of honest research and against superficial work, and that he opposed undue haste in bringing the work to a conclusion.

Nemos, unlike Oak, was a writer of smooth, flowing English. On account of his foreign birth he had no preference in the selection of a field, and wrote for more different volumes than any other member of the library force. His great ability, and his consequent position of all-round man, are to be accounted for by great natural endowment supplemented by a thorough training in youth in his own country, a schooling during his London residence in the philosophy of his own country as well as that of the German universities, and a wide acquaintance with European languages. With a remarkable faculty for systematizing work, he was useful, honorable, and trustworthy.

To Mrs. Victor was a.s.signed the agreeable task of working up the field in which she had long taken special interest. She was the only member of the staff who had a literary reputation before entering the library. Noted as a poetess of unusual promise in her earlier days, she had also written excellent prose for different journals, among them a magazine history of the United States published in serial form by the Harpers, until the beginning of the Civil War compelled the discontinuance of the publication in which it appeared. As a contributor to the San Francisco papers in the early "sixties," she had met with p.r.o.nounced success, while her work on her projected History of Oregon and her publication of two works on the Northwest fitted her for her special field. She had the enviable faculty of putting life into her writings, and it was partially on account of her graceful style that Mr. Bancroft sought her services, for his eye was always attracted by good literary work. But the volumes written by Mrs. Victor were of a far different stamp from the popular literary history. The late Mary Sheldon Barnes, professor of history in Stanford University, declared that she had done her work well. All who were acquainted with her personally recognized the fact that she placed the truth as she conceived it before all else. The leading opponents of the stand she took on disputed questions freely recognized the fact that she had striven to do conscientious, painstaking work. Given to speaking what she believed was the whole truth, even when it was contrary to her immediate interest to do so, she was the last of all persons whom a regard for literary effect would swerve from the path of historical accuracy.

A better man for chief Spanish authority than Thomas Savage could scarcely have been found. Thoroughly acquainted with the language by a life-long residence in Spanish America, he had a natural fondness for history, to which his long continuance in the consular service had added a habit of accuracy, and a capacity for hard work. The fifth volume of the History of Mexico, embracing the history of that country from 1824 to 1861, and the third volume of the Central American history which threads out the tangled skein of the history of the five little republics in the nineteenth century, serve as examples of the vast amount of detail which his writing covered, to say nothing of his labors in collecting and extracting an overwhelming ma.s.s of material on Spanish American history. All agree that he was a polished and sound man.

In the writers of smaller parts of the history, we find that the qualifications and fitness for the individual field of writing were no less than in those who prepared more ma.n.u.script. Peatfield's connection with the British consular service bespeaks his reliability and capability; Bates' occupancy of a responsible position under a prominent English educator, and the high regard in which his work was held by Hittell bear witness that he was competent to write history; and Petroff's standing as a scholar in his own country, together with his thorough acquaintance with Alaska, vouch for the character of his work.

While the Bancroft corps of writers were not infallible, they were a cla.s.s of persons in whose integrity and accuracy we may have as great confidence as in the average historian. We can only regret that we can not point out all parts of the work done by each, and that we can not show in detail the extent of Mr. Bancroft's editorial alterations of their work. This latter feature, inherent in the Bancroft plan of writing history, is its greatest weakness, since it of necessity involves some uncertainty as to whether the words we are reading are those of the author who wrote the volume, or the interpretation of Mr.

Bancroft. A comparative study of the style of what we know to be the work of the respective writers may suffice to settle a given case. We may state as a fact that the majority of alterations in the ma.n.u.scripts of the chief a.s.sistants were due to the necessity of condensation; and that, aside from this, the revision of their work usually consisted merely in the suppression of radical utterances and the interlineation of a few lines occasionally for literary effect.

The somewhat rough estimate given of the number of volumes written by the respective writers indicates that Mr. Bancroft's revisions const.i.tute about one page in fifty of the work in fields a.s.signed to his a.s.sistants, although the average may be lower. In view of these facts, the knowledge that those who wrote the Bancroft histories were capable, honest persons, must tend decidedly toward the increasing of our general confidence in the series.

FOOTNOTES:

[40] This is on the authority of Savage.

PIONEER PAPERS OF PUGET SOUND.

By CLARENCE B. BAGLEY.

The trapper, the trader, the missionary, and the printer were the pioneers of "Old Oregon," as the original territory lying between the Rocky Mountains and the Pacific Ocean, and extending northward from California to the British possessions may be properly called. A mere handful of patriotic Americans founded a provisional government for this vast wilderness in 1843, and the American Government enclosed it safely in the national fold in 1846 by treaty with Great Britain, and organized it into a territory August 14, 1848.

Those who are the leading spirits in the several historical societies of the Northwest, and the writers of its history, realize the true value to be placed upon the labors of the pioneer printers and newspaper men of "Old Oregon." This expression is tautological. There were no newspaper men who were not printers in the pioneer days.

It has been my good fortune, as child, boy, and man, to know nearly all the old newspaper men of Oregon and Washington of that period by sight, and to be on terms of friendship with most of them, as well as most intimate with the majority. Among them were:

Ashael Bush, W. L. Adams, Thomas H. Pearne, T. J. Dryer, Harvey W.

Scott, H. L. Pittock, Beriah Brown, James O'Meara, W. Lair Hill, Wm.

G. T'Vault, Samuel A. Clarke, Mrs. Duniway, D. W. Craig, John Atkinson, E. M. Waite, L. Samuels, John Burnett, J. M. Baltimore, William Newell, P. B. Johnson, R. R. Rees, E. T. Gunn, Charles Besserer, Eugene Semple, A. M. Poe, John Miller Murphy, Randall H.

Hewitt, L. G. Abbott, Thornton F. McElroy, James N. Gale, J. R.

Watson, David Higgins, Charles and Thomas W. Prosch, John F. Damon, D.

C. Ireland, Francis H. Cook, S. L. Maxwell, H. C. Patrick, R. F.

Radebaugh, and many of their contemporaries, as well as a host of their successors.

Nearly all these were practical printers, and most of them skillful at the case, capable of taking entire charge of the mechanical department of the early day printing offices.