he said, resulted from two forces, of which the former found expression in organizations of men of wealth designed to explore, colonize, and develop the western wilderness, while the other arose from the instinct of the hunter and explorer and found incarnation in the frontier backwoodsman. He then proceeded to show, from a research into the careers of Daniel Boone and Richard Henderson, the coordination of these two elements in the westward expansion. From the records of Rowan County, N. C., was shown the relationship between these two-Boone, impoverished by many lawsuits, turning for assistance to Henderson, an attorney of that county, Henderson organizing for purposes of exploration the company first called "Richard Henderson & Co.," later the Louisa, and then the Transylvania Co. In 1764 Boone made his first exploration in Kentucky, hunting and trapping on his own account, and prospecting and exploring on behalf of Henderson's land company. In 1769, after a conference at Salisbury of Boone, Henderson, and other Kentucky explorers, Boone entered on his explorations of 1769-1771, the main object of which was really to recruit his shattered fortunes by acting as scout and confidential agent of Henderson and his company in the examination of lands in Tennessee and Kentucky.

In Columbia the next morning occurred the usual joint session with the Mississippi Valley Historical Association, presided over by Prof. James A. James as president of the latter body, and opened with an address of welcome by the mayor of Columbia, Hon. Wade Hampton Gibbes. Three papers were read. The first, by Prof. Isaac J. Cox, of Cincinnati, dealt with the relation between Gen. Wilkinson and Gov. Folch. The paper was based on material recently discovered in the Spanish and Mexican archives. Beginning with a secret interview between Wilkinson and Folch in 1804, the writer showed how Wilkinson secured the renewal of his pension from Spain by promising to assist the Spanish authorities to make the transfer of Louisiana useless by informing them of the future plans of the American Government. He traced the processes by which during the next three years Wilkinson plotted alternately for and against the interests of both nations, with self-seeking so treacherous that finally no one but Jefferson seemed to trust him, the climax being reached by Jefferson's commissioning him in 1809 as his envoy to the captain general in Cuba and to Gov. Folch to propose an alliance to which Spanish America, Brazil, and the United States, and even Great Britain should be parties.

The second paper was by Prof. Clarence E. Carter, of Miami University, on "Some aspects of British policy in West Florida," 2 mainly relating to the attempts to establish settlements in the region added

1 Printed in the American Historical Review for July, 1914.
To be printed in the Mississippi Valley Historical Review.

to that province by the change of boundary, from 31° N. latitude to the Yazoo, effected in 1764. The narrative tended to exhibit the Government's management of this province as marked by the same indecision and the same lack of insight and vision which so vitiated its efforts at a solution of the general problem of imperial organization. Dr. Arthur C. Cole's paper on the "South and the right of secession in the early fifties," was occupied chiefly with the alignment of parties on the question of the right of secession, as that question was raised in the local contests in the Southern States just before and just after the compromise of 1850. The Whigs and Democrats reversed the ground occupied in 1832. The Whigs were fairly well united in the denial of any right of secession, but asserted the inalienable right of revolution as an ultimate remedy. The victory of the Union Party in the lower South in the elections of 1851 did not mean the defeat of the doctrine of secession, but was due to divisions among the Democrats.

The two conferences which marked the afternoon and with which the sessions of the association were concluded had each, because of local circumstances, to be crowded into a single hour. The conference of archivists, presided over by Mr. Victor H. Paltsits, chairman of the Public Archives Commission, was almost fatally compressed, so far as discussion was concerned. The chairman stated that the commision expected to append to its annual report for 1913 reports on the archives of California and Wyoming, and a list of reports and representations of the board of trade to the King in Council, Parliament, secretary of state, etc., and that preliminary arrangements had been made for reports on the archives of South Carolina and Vermont. Specimens of the commission's proposed Primer of Archival Economy for the Use of American Archivists were presented in the form of two tentative chapters; the first, on archives, by Prof. Charles M. Andrews, and the fifth, on fixtures, fittings, and furniture, by Mr. Paltsits; but there was no time for discussing them. Some remarks were made on the present status of the movement for a national archive building in Washington.

Dr. Solon J. Buck presented a paper on the "Advantages and disadvantages of centralizing local archives at the State capital." His belief was that, with regard to many large classes of local material, not much needed for immediate purposes of local business, the interests of history were best served by their removal to a central depository, where trained archivists and systematic arrangements were more likely to be provided. The paper was discussed by Mr. Connor, Mr. Salley, Dr. Owen, and Dr. Rowland, custodians of archives in North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama, and Mississippi, respectively, and by others.

1 To be printed in the Mississippi Valley Historical Review.

A fuller report of this conference will be found below in the present volume.

1

The conference by formal resolution gave expression to its hope that the State of South Carolina would go forward rapidly in the work of publishing the archival materials for the earlier history of the State.

The conference on ancient history, presided over by Prof. Lewis P. Chamberlayne, of the University of South Carolina, had papers by Dr. Ralph V. D. Magoffin, of Johns Hopkins University, on the "Modern making of ancient history;" by Dr. Frank B. Marsh, of the University of Texas, on the "Problem of provincial administration under the Roman Republic"; and by Dr. Richard F. Scholz, of the University of California, on the "Antecedents of the Holy Roman Empire."

Mr. Magoffin's paper passed in rapid review a number of the newer sciences, auxiliary to the researches of the student of ancient history, and then gave more in detail, from both published and unpublished material, a variety of instances illustrating the value which numismatics, epigraphy, and archaeology have for that student.

The problem of provincial administration under the Roman Republic, as stated by Dr. Marsh, lay in the difficulty of reconciling a foreign policy resulting in annexations with the strong reluctance of the senate to enlarge its own numbers or the general machinery of government. He showed how this reluctance checked Roman expansion in the period before the conquest of 146 B. C., and again how at a later period, the half century preceding 63 B. C., when new annexations had exhausted the new governors at the senate's disposal, even under the system of promagistrates, that body again became opposed to a policy of imperial expansion.

The effort of Dr. Scholz's paper was to trace the antecedents of the medieval universal state from the monarchy of the first world king and god king, Alexander, with its alliance of altar and throne, through the development of cults of Hellenistic god kings, organized deification at Rome, the Messianic ideal, and the political-religious empire of Augustus.

Prof. Olmstead, of Missouri, remarked on the need of paying due regard to the history of the subject peoples.

It remains to describe briefly the annual business meeting of the association, held on the afternoon of the second day at Charleston, with President Dunning in the chair. The report of the secretary showed a total membership of 2,843. The treasurer reported net disbursements of $9,893, with net receipts of $10,261. The total assets of the association were $27,283, a slight gain over the preceding year. The report of the executive council described steps taken toward

1 Printed ibid.

The formal minutes of the meeting are presented in full below.

additional promotion of historical research, the prospective establishment of a headquarters for members of the association engaged in work in the archives and libraries in London, the establishment of a standing committee upon the study of the military history of the United States, and the offer of $200 as a prize, to be awarded in December, 1915, for the best essay in military history submitted in that year. The association accepted the offer and appointed a committee of award. Upon recommendation by the council, it was voted that the meeting of December, 1915, be held in Washington; that of December, 1914, is to be held in Chicago. Some preparations were announced for the additional meeting which is to be held in California in the summer of 1915, Mr. Rudolph J. Taussig being made chairman of the committee on local arrangements and Prof. Ephraim D. Adams of the committee on program. The budget for 1914 was also presented. The council announced the reelection of J. F. Jameson as a member of the board of editors of the American Historical Review, he being the member whose six-year term expired at the end of the year 1913.

The report of the Pacific coast branch was offered by Prof. Edmond S. Meany, who gave a brief account of the recent meetings of that branch at Los Angeles and Seattle. Brief reports were presented on behalf of the historical manuscripts commission by its chairman, Mr. Worthington C. Ford, and on behalf of the public archives commission by its chairman, Mr. Victor H. Paltsits. The substance of the latter report has been mentioned above. The committee on publications reported especially as to the series of prize essays, which is in a fair way to sustain itself. The report of the board of editors of the American Historical Review, presented by its chairman, Prof. Andrew C. McLaughlin, related chiefly to its new circular to reviewers. Prof. Henry Johnson, for the advisory board of the History Teacher's Magazine, reported gratifying progress of that journal in public favor. The committee on bibliography announced that the execution of the proposed bibliography of American travels is now assured, Dr. Bernard C. Steiner having undertaken to be its editor. Reports were also made on behalf of the committee on a bibliography of modern English history by Prof. A. L. Cross, a member of that committee; by Dr. J. F. Jameson, as editor of the series of Original Narratives of Early American History; and on behalf of the general committee by Prof. Frederic L. Paxson, chairman. The chairman of the Herbert Baxter Adams prize committee, Prof. Burr, announced that the committee had awarded the prize to Miss Violet Barbour for an essay entitled "Henry Bennet, Earl of Arlington."

The report of the committee on nominations appointed at the last annual meeting was read, in the absence of its chairman, Prof.

William MacDonald, by Prof. C. W. Alvord, a member of the committee. The committee presented the following nominations for officers and members of the council for the year 1914, and all were unanimously elected by the association: President, Andrew C. McLaughlin; first vice president, H. Morse Stephens; second vice president, George L. Burr; secretary, Waldo G. Leland; treasurer, Clarence W. Bowen; secretary of the council, Evarts B. Greene; curator, A. Howard Clark; elective members of the executive council, Herman V. Ames, Dana C. Munro, Archibald C. Coolidge, John M. Vincent, Frederic Bancroft, and Charles H. Haskins. A vote expressing appreciation of the disinterested and efficient manner in which Prof. Haskins had for a long period of years-1900 to 1914conducted the difficult and laborious office of secretary of the council was passed by the association in view of his retirement from that position.

Remarks by Dr. Dunbar Rowland, of Mississippi, on the methods by which nominations to office in the association were effected, led to an amicable discussion of the subject, at the end of which the new committee on nominations, about to be appointed for 1914, was charged to consider and report on means for better eliciting the general opinion. The list of appointments to standing committees made by the council was then read, and the association adjourned.

PROGRAM OF THE TWENTY-NINTH ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION, HELD IN CHARLESTON AND COLUMBIA, DECEMBER 29-31, 1913.

Monday, December 29 (Charleston).

9 a. m.: The New Charleston Hotel. Meeting of the executive council of the American Historical Association.

10 a. m.: Conferences. The Citadel.

Historical materials. Chairman, Joseph W. Barnwell, president of the South Carolina Historical Society. "Manuscripts and historical archives," Worthington C. Ford, Massachusetts Historical Society. "Frauds in historical portraiture, or spurious portraits of historical personages," Charles Henry Hart, Philadelphia. "Materials for an atlas of the historical geography of the United States," C. O. Paullin, Carnegie Institution of Washington. Discussion of Dr. Paullin's paper, Frederic L. Paxson, University of Wisconsin.

Social and industrial aspects of modern history. Chairman, James T. Shot well, Columbia University. "Social forces in English politics in the early nineteenth century," Walter P. Hall, Princeton University. "Social and industrial history in colleges and schools," James Sullivan, Boys' High School, Brooklyn, N. Y. Discussion on the treatment of social and industrial history in colleges and schools, led by W. W. Davis, University of Kansas; Frederic Duncalf, University of Illinois; J. Lynn Barnard, School of Pedagogy, Philadelphia; A. I. Andrews, Tufts College; Helen L. Young, Normal College, New York.

1 Further remarks upon the matter by Dr. Rowland, Prof. William MacDonald, Prof. Sidney B. Fay, Prof. John H. Latané, and Dr. J. F. Jameson may be found in The Nation of Jan. 22, 29, Feb. 5, 26, and Mar. 19, and in the American Historical Review, XIX, 488-490.