writers would be fair, if we overlook the fact that its wording tends to give an exaggerated idea of Mr. Bancroft's part in it—were the name of the latter but printed on the title page as editor or compiler. But by omitting either word he has announced himself to the world as author. His own explanation for this seems to be that he considers himself responsible for the work in treatment and style (Native Races I, Preface XIII), but the real reason is no doubt to be found in a desire to give the work standing in the literary world by ascribing it to one name already quite widely known among book dealers and publishers.
As regards scientific merit these volumes can not make great claims. No serious attempt was made to collect facts concerning the American Indians of the West at first hand. Mr. Bancroft made no pretensions as an antiquarian or ethnologist, content with compiling what others had written and thus discharging his duty toward the introductory part of his work that he might the sooner take up the more serious task of writing the histories. Different parts of the Native Races differ greatly in value. Oak was habitually scholarly and always made an effort at honest research. Nemos was likewise thoroughly reliable. Goldschmidt was noted for his shiftlessness, and Fisher and Harcourt are charged with such uncritical methods as the incorporation in their writings of statements found in magazine articles which were nowhere verified. (Mrs. Victor had learned of this.) The last three must, therefore, be considered clever and brilliant writers rather than critical historians.
The chief value of the Native Races consisted in the fact that it presented in accessible form a classified collection of all the facts known concerning the Indians of the Pacific slope. Philosophers who made use of these facts in their generalizations, while prizing the work
