considerably." Lemaire's narrative, Ephemerides sive descriptio navigationis australis institutæ Ao. 1615, first appeared as the second part of the Latin edition of Herrera's Novus orbis at Amsterdam in 1622, and in French and German the same year. The book is commonly called the "Collection de Michel Colin." 1 The maps are De Bry's; and we now find the Tierra del Fuego taking its comparatively diminutive form at the apex of the continent, though the old plates with the exaggerated Antarctic continent went slowly out of use.2

While Schreten's narrative was keeping the printers busy, another expedition under the brothers Nodal set sail (1618-1619). The narrative of the cruise, Relacion del viage, etc., ap eared at Madrid in 1621.1 The map, which on account of its rarity is supposed to have been suppressed by the Spanish Government, was made by Pedro Teixeira Falhernas, the royal cosmographer. Nocal had with him some Dutch sailors and pilots who had been with Sch uten, and rounded Cape Horn and returned to Spain through Magellan's Straits. His drafts of Tierra del Fuego are superior to Schouten's, and he put Cape Horn a degree nearer its correct latitude. The strait at the southeast of Tierra del Fuego, called after Lemaire before, Nodal now called St. Vincent, — a name which was retained for some time on the Spanish maps. The west coast of Patagonia is only roughly drawn. The eastern coast is one of the correctest up to this time; and he gives the proper easterly extension of the southern limb of the continent, which none of the other map-makers had recognized.

There was now little to mend in the general contour of South America on the best maps of the rest of the seventeenth century, though much error in detail still prevailed. The maps of De Laet (1630), of the Mercator atlas (1635), of Jannson's Atlas Minor (1651), and of Heylin in his Cosmographie (1663), are good examples of the better cartography. The tendency had been to place Cape Horn short of its proper latitude; but Jannson, in 1666, put it a degree too far south. In 1669 Sir John Narborough was despatched by Charles II. to survey the Patagonian waters. He applied many English names, displacing the earlier Spanish and Dutch ones, and used largely antecedent Dutch charts. The map he made is in the British Museum, and a printed copy was published, much reduced by Thornton. There is no present occasion to trace the cartography of the South American continent beyond this point.

1 Sabin, vol. xiii. nos. 55,394-55.395; Leclerc, nos. 1,980-1,982; Carter-Brown, ii. 250; Nodal was reprinted at Cadiz in 1769. This edition is so rare that Rich priced it in 1832 at £10 10s. (Catalogue, no. 158). The map is Kohl's no. 404.

2 It is sketched in Kohl's Magellan's-Strasse, where are also a sketch from a manuscript map (1640) by the Jesuits of Chili, in the National Library at Paris, and the map to Brouwer's Reise, 1706.

NOTE. This essay was plated in July, 1885. Since then a posthumous work of Henry Stevens has appeared: Johann Schöner. A reproduction of the globe of 1523 long lost; his dedicatory letter and the "De Moluccis" of Maximilianus Transylvanus, with a new translation and notes on the globe. Edited with an introd. and bibliography by C. H. Coote (London, 1888). The preface says that this hitherto unknown series of gores (globe) passed from Henry Stevens' hands to C. H. Kalbfleisch, of New York, in the autumn of 1885. It is held to be of importance in respect to the track of Magellan. The volume is accompanied by the following fac-similes, in addition to the gores of 1523. The Lenox globe; the Boulanger globe (Tross gores); the Schöner globes of 1515 and 1520, and the Cantino map. These have all been reproduced, or the American parts of them, in earlier volumes of the present work. The Lenox globe was taken (Vol. III., 212) from the cut used by Mr. Coote in the Encyclopædia Britannica, acknowledgment being made to that and to the original Stevens source. (Vol. III., 214.)

APPENDIX.

By the Editor.

THE MANUSCRIPT SOURCES OF THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION.

I. THE FEDERAL ARCHIVES.

BOTH Sparks and Bancroft inspected to a considerable degree the archives of the general government and of the original thirteen States, and examined some of the more important collections of papers amassed by prominent actors of the Revolution, and to some extent of later periods. When they began this work, something had already been done by the general government in printing certain parts of its archives; but not much had been done by any State; and scarcely any of the private papers of the participants in the Revolution had been printed in any systematic way. Previous to the time when these historians set about their studies, and Peter Force began to amass his collections, now between sixty and seventy years ago, there had been no one, if we except Gordon and Ramsay, who had at all pushed their researches so as to include any considerable examination of the government archives. After both of these early writers had done their work, there was in 1800 a fire in the War Department, which destroyed some portion of the papers in its keeping; and in 1814, at the capture of the city by the British, there was similar destruction, more or less severe at the War, Navy, and Treasury offices,2 and the Treasury again suffered in 1833. The Department of State escaped such perils, and it has been the depository of the principal government records, ever since the first Congress, by an act approved Sept. 15, 1789, made it finally responsible for the safe custody of "the acts, records, and seal of the United States." 3 The same act left it to the discretion of the President to send such papers as might be determined on to the War and Treasury Departments, which accounts for rosters and accounts of the Revolution being in those departments.

A report of the council of the American Antiquarian Society, made in October, 1882, by the Hon. George F. Hoar, senator of the United States from Massachusetts, and printed in their Proceedings (new series, vol. ii. p. 118, etc.), gives an "account of the material for historical study now accessible in Washington," in which he enumerates the records of the prize appeal cases (from 1777 down) as a part of the archives of the Supreme Court, which are of themselves complete from 1790 down; and the records of the postal system after its organization by Franklin in 1775,- as among the papers of the Post-Office Department. I learn from Mr. Paul Leicester Ford that a part of the Post Office papers (1775-1789) are among the papers of the Continental Congress in the Department of State. None of the papers in the Post-Office Department cover Franklin's term; the earliest being the ledger kept by Richard Bache, which in 1865 was printed in fac-simile as Franklin's ledger.

In the Indian Bureau there are materials relating to the history of the tribes before the Revolution, collected by Jedidiah Morse.

It is, however, in the library of Congress and at the Department of State that the greatest wealth of Revolutionary papers is found. In the library of Congress are over sixty bound folio volumes of military papers of the generals of the Revolutionary War; the papers of Rochambeau; thirty-two orderly books, including Washington's at Valley Forge; the Paul Jones papers, in twelve volumes (1776-1778); Georgia state papers (1775-1780); documents of New Hampshire; of Delaware (1680–1794); journal of General Bourne (1771); letter-books of General Nathanael Greene (1781, 1782), in two volumes; journal of the Baltimore Committee of Safety (1774-1776); record-books of Ephraim Blaine, commissary-general of the Revolutionary army, 1777

1 These are now in the library of Congress, and include a large collection of maps.

* Reports regarding this loss through invasion are by P. Magruder, clerk of the House (13th Cong., 3d sess., Sept. 22, 1814, House Doc.); by W. Jones, on the loss at the Navy Department (State Papers, Naval Affairs, i. 320);

on the loss of the Executive Department (House Doc., Nov. 17, 1814); a report on Magruder's neglect (House Doc., Dec. 12, 1814), and his reply (Dec. 19); Joseph Pearson's report on the destruction of the library (House Doc. Jan. 16, 1815).

3 Statutes at Large, i. 29, 69.

raz dhaos of the Continental Congress came the diplomatic e of Congress: but after August 10, 1781, by R. R. LivingI embraces not only the correspondence with the American in the papers of Frann, Arthur Lee, John Adams, Silas Deane, came a the government held with Gérard (1778-79) and with Luzerne 1. 1 ts treponame, ma by Sparks, who latterly intended writing a Jennum, are a the Spri MSS. Harvard College Library.

Stacks was empired to edit a selection from these diplomatic papers, amine, appeared in twelve volumes, at Boston, in

US EST IN cangs me be Sparks in his edition are contained in the Report * Sevar Da no. 14, recommending a reprinting of the Corvar pusat mit Spars mmmed all letters or portions of letters tending to show a Frac pincus at supersede Washington by Marshal Broglie; the movements ~~ aza i staples withdrawal, and to have Franklin recalled from HAAS DALE IN Atrocities of British troops and of refugees in the United States, The America apicomans as a tam against Great Britain and a set-off against 150, and that Sparks further dripped important passages respecting ther passages as showed the extent of the views prevailing among the negotiators of Itart was one I partibus, act of concession on Great Britain's part, which view

bene. 2:01. Mr. C. F. Adams (John Adams's Works, và p. 4' says of the Digi. Corresp. of the Rev., that it is "a valuable work, but unfortunately disfigured by numerees mographical errors, especially in proper names, and wanting in a thorough index." The letters in foreign lanpages are translated into English. He also (John Adami's W ́orks, vä p. 190) points out how inadequately this is done in some instances. Sparks has not escaped criticism for exceeding the ordinary limits of annotation in editing such works, and expressing party views upon mooted questions. John Jay's Address on the Peace Negotiations gr82–83 (1884), p. 43

Congress voted, 1830, $31,300 to carry out Sparks's contract with Henry Clay, Secretary of State, to print the series 1--8-1-83; and, 1832, $12,000 for the series 17831-80, with additional series in 1833, 1834. The legislation will be found in Statutes at Large, iv. 382, 513, 620, 669, 689 743; V. 170, 171.

served to strengthen the previous territorial rights of the colonies. Further than this, the report says that Sparks omitted, and gave no signs of omitting, whatever in his judgment was unnecessary or impolitic to print; and that he changed what did not satisfy his taste in style, sometimes to the detriment of the sense. The Report then goes on to cite numerous instances in support of its allegations.

The report was probably written or arranged by Dr. Francis Wharton, then an officer of the State Department, who was finally, by a joint resolution of Congress, approved Aug. 13, 1888, entrusted with the editorship of a new collection of the diplomatic correspondence, in which the papers used by Sparks should be given "in their integrity," and others obtained from abroad and from private hands should be added to double the extent of the publication, the whole to be annotated with historical and legal notes. Dr. Wharton had got well on in the preparation of copy, and some part had been put into type, when he died. It is understood that the work will be carried to completion under other supervision.

Further, among the papers transmitted from the Continental Congress are its domestic correspondence, the memorials and petitions presented to it, the reports of its committees, the original motions made in its sessions, and its journals. These last daily records are almost wholly in the handwriting of Charles Thompson,1 the Secretary of Congress through all its years.2