William Dunlap, History of New Netherlands, Province of New York, and State of New York, vol. i., pp. 298-310.

"Where is the man to be found at this day . . . who will believe that the apprehension of Episcopacy contributed fifty years ago, as much as any other cause, to arouse the attention not only of the inquiring mind, but of the common people, and urge them to close thinking on the constitutional authority of Parliament over the colonies? This, nevertheless, was a fact certain as any in the history of North America.

'The opinion, the principles, the spirit, the temper, the views, designs, intrigues, and arbitrary exertions of power displayed by the Church of England at that time towards the Dissenters, as they were contemptuously called, though in reality the churchmen were the real dissenters, ought to be stated at full length.

"In Virginia, the Church of England was established by law in exclusion and without toleration."-John Adams, Works, vol. x., pp. 185, 186.

At the commencement of the Revolution, public feeling in the eastern colonies was excited by the fears of the spiritual jurisdiction of the British ecclesiastics. Elbridge Gerry and Samuel Adams, for political effect, led off with predictions as groundless as they were vain. Plain facts demonstrated that, notwithstanding these misrepresentations, Episcopalians were the leading architects of the great work of American Independence. Franklin, Laurens, the Pinckneys, Wythe, Marshall, Pendleton, the Randolphs, Hamilton, Washington, Jefferson, Patrick Henry, Monroe, Rutledge, the Lees, Jay, Williams, Gen. Wayne, Robt. R. Livingston, Gouverneur, Lewis, and Robert Morris, Duer, Duane, Lord Stirling, William Samuel Johnson, Chase, Madison, and a host of others, distinguished patriots of the Revolution, were of the Episcopal Church. -Opdike, History of the Episcopal Church in Providence, R. I., pp. 241, 242.

This sermon was printed at Boston in 1707. A reprint of the Boston edition may be found in the Collections of the New York Historical Society for the Year 1870, pp. 409-453. 'American Presbyterianism, pp. 152–155.

CHAPTER VI

THE AMERICAN PEOPLE NOT RACIALLY IDENTICAL WITH THOSE OF NEW ENGLAND

THE

HE second reason for the undue prominence of New England in the popular conception of American history, to which reference was made in the introductory chapter, is found in the absence, for a long time, of any systematic or comprehensive treatment by the writers of the middle and southern colonies of the history of their own districts.' A start was made in this direction, it is true, by Dr. David Ramsay in his History of South Carolina (1789), followed, with less degrees of excellence, by Hugh Williamson's History of North Carolina, Gordon's Histories of Pennsylvania and New Fersey, and Day's, Howe's, and Barber's Historical Collections of Pennsylvania, Virginia, and New Jersey; but these books were all written at a date when there was little material collected or available, and before the inception of modern methods of historic inquiry and analysis; and they are only good examples of what can be done by conscientious workmen without proper tools, or suitable material at hand on which to work. Bancroft was the first American historian to do even partial justice to the subject from a national standpoint. Foote's Sketches of Virginia and of North Carolina are among the most valuable contributions to the early history of these States that we have, but these works were written nearly fifty years ago. Bishop Meade's Churches and Families of Virginia also contains a vast amount of local and family history in connection with that of the Episcopal churches.

In New England, from the time of its first settlement, more or less ample and detailed records of the political and social history of nearly every community, however small, have been preserved in written form, as well as much of personal history. The publication of these records, which has been carried on for many years by public and private agencies, and their use as the bases for many of our popular histories, has served to disseminate a vastly greater amount of information about the people and events with which these records are concerned than those of any other part of America.

Literary genius, likewise, has aided materially in forming our popular ideals of characters and events in connection with certain phases of American history, particularly with those of New England. Indeed, certain literary productions may have been the sole sources of information regarding occurrences which are now reputed historic. This has been true in all ages. The Arabian Nights, in the incidental evidence which it affords, as well as by reason of its own intrinsic merit, must always be our chief authority for the high degree of civilization attained by the early Mohammedans; just as the military prowess of ancient Greece has from time

immemorial been best appreciated through the glowing imageries of the minstrel poet, and the glory of English history been best expressed in the imaginary conceptions of an obscure playwright. Shakspeare has given us an idea of the character of Richard III. and his predecessors and followers, as well as of that of Macbeth, which a more thorough investigation — while showing it to be in a large measure false- can never completely correct. In like manner, Walter Scott has typified in the personality of the first Richard all the romantic tendencies of the age of the Crusaders, with the result that his highly idealized portrait will ever be preferred to the less flattering though more honest delineation of history. So it is that the bestknown pictures of early American life and character presented in our romantic literature, being taken for the most part through New England lenses, can be considered, from an historical standpoint, only with due allowance for that fact. Hawthorne has immortalized the Puritan, just as Cooper has created the American Indian of the popular mind; yet, however true the former's characterization of the early New Englander may be, it has but little more value, as a type of the true American eponym, than that of the latter. These various aids and influences, either of a literary or historic nature, have not until quite recently been available for the study of American history in its broader sense; and we are only just beginning to get the benefit of their assistance in the examination of other than the New England portion of it. But this examination can never be carried on with entire satisfaction, until the complete publication of the early records of the general government. An attempt was made to this end some fifty or sixty years ago, which began quite favorably, and resulted in the publication of Force's series of Archives pertaining to affairs at the beginning of the Revolutionary struggle, and the projection of other series. But that work was dropped long before completion, and beyond nine volumes of Archives of the years 1775 and 1776, and the several volumes of State Papers of later date, very little other data has been printed. There is a vast amount of material relating to the colonial period and to the progress of the war and the subsequent formation of our system of government which still remains to be published.

It is, however, to the recent enlightened policy of many of the State governments of the original colonies that we are indebted for the inauguration of a movement looking to the conservation of the materials for their early history in a form that makes them at once both accessible and capable of preservation. This consists in the publication of various volumes of State archives, Revolutionary rosters, and documentary and other records, of which many series have already been issued by the States of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina, and others are in course of preparation. Of these, by far the most useful and comprehensive in their preparation are the fifty volumes of Archives brought out by the State of Pennsylvania under the capable editorship of Dr. William H. Egle, for many years the State librarian.

In New York, up to 1887, there had been published a Documentary History (4 vols., 1850) and seventeen volumes (1856-1887) of documents relating to the colonial history, including a roster of Revolutionary soldiers. New Jersey published twenty volumes of Archives between 1872 and 1893, and also a Revolutionary roster.

Besides these State publications, the various State historical societies of the older colonies have also awakened in late years to the fact that, in order to justify their right to existence, it will be necessary for them to do something of a less trivial nature than merely to publish reports of their business meetings and lengthy obituaries of their deceased members. In consequence we are beginning to benefit by their labors. The New York society gives the best promise of future accomplishments, if the industry of its members is at all equal to the opportunities afforded in the wealth of documentary material now undergoing classification by the State officials.

The Historical Society of the State of Pennsylvania is unfortunate in being located away from the seat of the State government. Its headquarters are in Philadelphia, where live most of its members, and consequently its work is directed more along the line of local investigation than concerned with the history of the State at large. It might more appropriately be called the Historical Society of Philadelphia. In that field its labors are invaluable. Its chief publication is the Pennsylvania Magazine, a large quarterly, established in 1877, and a model periodical of the class. In the Society's early days a number of volumes relating to the history of the State were also issued, but few in recent years. The inattention on the part of this Society to that portion of the State outside of Philadelphia, however, is more than made up by the private enterprise of Dr. Egle, already mentioned in connection with the publication of the State Archives. During the past twenty years this gentleman, in addition to his work on the State Archives, published on his own. behalf more than a dozen volumes of historical collections relating to interior Pennsylvania. The debt owed to him by all students of that part of early American history is one that will steadily increase with the passing years. The chief work of the Maryland society up to this date has been the preparation of sixteen volumes of Maryland Archives (1883-1897), which were printed by the State, and nine or ten volumes of Collections. The Historical Society of Richmond has also contributed nearly a dozen volumes (1882-1891) of Collections relating to Virginia. There is a rich field in that State for the future historian of America, but up to the present time a comparative dearth of published material. Some early history of North Carolina, including a roster of Revolutionary soldiers, has been given in the Colonial Records of that State (18 vols., 1886-1900); but South Carolina has produced only a few small volumes of Collections, issued by its Historical Society some forty years ago (1857-59); and Georgia still less.

In addition to the various general historical societies in these States, there are also many other organizations devoted to the collection of historical

matter relating to special classes of the population. Of these may be mentioned the Holland Society of New York, the Huguenot Society, and the Scotch-Irish Society of America. The one last named held an annual congress each year from 1889 to 1897, and published nine volumes of its Collections. Their contents are chiefly made up from the addresses delivered at the annual meetings; hence there is considerable difference in their degrees of merit.

None of these works compare in thoroughness or scope with the publications of the New England State governments and of their various historical and antiquarian societies. There is nothing in the Middle States equal to the Plymouth or Suffolk Records of Massachusetts, for instance; or the Provincial, State, or Town Papers of New Hampshire; or the New England Historical and Genealogical Register.

As another result of the fecundity and one-sidedness of the New England writers before 1870, it has been long customary to ascribe to the English element in the American population the credit not only for all the early achievements of the nation in war and peace,' but also for having furnished practically all the colonists who settled in the country before the Revolution.' As a matter of fact, nothing could be more erroneous. The population of the New England States at the date of the first general census (1790) was 1,009,408, and the total white population of the country, 3,172,006. Bancroft estimated the white population of the colonies in 1775 to have been about 2,100,000; and as it is probable that the New England population did not increase so rapidly between 1775 and 1790 as that of the other States, we may safely estimate it at one-third of the total population in 1775.

Of the total white population at the outbreak of the Revolution there is abundant evidence to show that at least one-third was not of English descent or sympathies at all, but consisted of a variety of nationalities, including the Germans, French, Hollanders, Swedes, and others. The Germans and Swiss comprised nearly a third of the population of Pennsylvania in 1776,* and they likewise had formed many communities in western Maryland and northern Virginia, as well as in the lower country of South Carolina. The Swedes made the first settlements in Pennsylvania and Delaware; but these were afterwards overrun by the Dutch, who acquired most of the territory along the Delaware River, as well as that of the Hudson and Mohawk valleys in New York, and a considerable portion of New Jersey. The Welsh had large grants of land and numerous settlements in Delaware and southeastern Pennsylvania. The French, usually Huguenot refugees from the German Palatine, or from Holland or Ireland, were likewise among the early colonizers of Pennsylvania, and the same people formed a large part of the first European population of the Carolinas. But the settlements of all these different nationalities taken together did not begin to equal in number or importance those of another class of people with which we now have to deal -a class that was as distinctly non-English as many of those just named;