Weekly journal-miner., 1909-01-06
HEHEARsEs HISTORY OF
 AMERICAN JOUNRAL

Taking as his subject "Tho Use of
 Newspapers for the History of the
 Period from ls50.ls17,' Mr. Rhodes ! said
 "The attitude of Society to the
 newspaper is unsympathe,ic and this
 affects to some degree the Ieeling of
 American historians when they con | sider the use of newspapers as aistori.
 cal materials, leading them to adopt an | apologetic tone in .Gstifying their em.
 Ploymcnt. This attitude is however
 beside the question as is seen when we detach ourselves from American life
 and conditions For example when
 Aulari criticises Taine for using two
 only of the twelve journals available
 for the history of the French Revolu.
 tion our impression is the same, as If
 Taine were criticised for the neglect
 of evidence of another class. Taking
 the newspaper for what it is, with dts
 virtues and its Limitations, 1t seems curious that au apology should be nee
 essary for it's use as historical mater.
 ial. For it is contemporary, written
 without Knowledge of the end, and its aim IS to print the news which is pres.
 ent politics. If it's relation is colored by honest or dishonest partisanship, that may be easily detected.
 ''FOr the history of the decade of
 ls5O'GO newspapers are indispensable to get at all the facts, to go 10 the bottom of things and to portray the changing public opinion which is a prominent feature of those ten years, As l based statement after statement upon newspaper authority, knowing that l was subjeeting myself to criti cism. could not keep thinking of the cogeney of the remark, so well attest. ed by variety of examples.
 '' A modern newspaper stat tcnent though probably true, if quoted in book as testimony, would be laughed at; but the letter of court gossip, if written some centuries ago, is thought good historical evidence. When we test newspaper evidence as we do all other evidence, taking into account the general situation, the surrounding in 1; auences and the individual bias of the journalist, we shall find it excellent | authority, contributing to vivid mar. ra,ive. This is especially SD for the decade of ls50-6O when it is well worth while to have the statements | sh' "Pih''h' VT Hu'h pi'dt I'uihhiot0 | as Greeley, Dana, Bryant, Bigelow, Raymond, Webb, Bowles, Thurlow, Weed, Schouler and Medin.
 'For the history of the Civil War he newspapers, solar as the Northern side is concerned, are not 80 important for historical evidence, as during the decade preceding it. The story of and battles, which natural. y fill SO much of this space is more ac. and thoroughly told in the publications of our gov ernmcnt, the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies. Tnc Southern newspapers, however, give many useful political facts nowhere 'lse to be found and they reflect ad nrably Southern society, peculiar in hat it was cut of from intercourse with the outer world owing to the eff. icient Federal blockade.
 "In the history of Reconstruction he historian may he to large extent independent the daily newspaper. Reconstruction was the work of Con ,ress and it's debates and nets are tae saential things.'
 MT. Rhodes summed mp his paper with the concluding remark: "The uty of the historian is not to decide | the newspapers are as good as they I ught to be, but to measure their in. |uence on the present and to recog. ize their importance as an ample and [ ontemporary record of the past" !" Il