On Canadian Archives

 

By Henry Hopper Miles

 

[Originally published by the Literary and Historical Society of Quebec in Transactions, New Series, No. 8 (1871)]

 

I.—The subject of this evening's paper could hardly be expected to recommend itself, on the grounds of novelty or originality, to the attention of the members of the Literary and Historical Society ; for the Society, in one form or another, has often had it under notice. Frequently, in the discussions which have taken place, the researches which have been prescribed to committees, and by the considerable expenditure incurred, it has manifested an anxious concern in relation to the foundations of our knowledge of the facts and events belonging to Canadian History. Some of the results, also considerable, are to be found in the published “ Transactions.”

 

But I here propose to present the subject from somewhat different points of view—not treading altogether on the old ground, and hoping to shew that there is still plenty of appropriate work for the Society to accomplish in the way of historical pioneering, and in the further prosecution of the legitimate objects of its mission.

 

II.—I shall first offer some preliminary observations on the subject of archives in general—taking this term to signify chiefly the records of facts and events which are of a more important and public character.

 

It would not be wholly irrelevant, if time and the occasion permitted, to speak at length of the various modes and processes to which mankind have in all ages had recourse for preserving the recollection of occurrences. We might advert to oral tradition, almost the sole method practiced among barbarians, and embracing, at more advanced stages of society, the public rehearsal of events on stated occasions to assemblies of men, in the shape of narratives in prose or song. But, though, to this day, so much of our knowledge of the past is allowed to be based upon tradition or mere hearsay, yet, for purposes demanding precise accuracy, and when great interests are at stake, we all know how often unreliable, indefinite, and even contradictory, is this sort of record, and that our confidence in it lessens with the lapse of time. I shall have occasion again to allude to such traditionary sources of knowledge further on.

 

Among the earlier inventions for recording facts, we might mention writing, or rather engraving, on the surface of various solid substances, such as stone tablets, tables of lead, copper, bronze, brass, wood, ivory, and thin sheets of wax. We read in Scripture of “ the law of God written on tables of stone,” and in Grecian and Roman History, of laws, orations and chronicles, engraved on plates of bronze and brass. Disraeli speaks of an Icelandic historian, who built a large wooden house, on the walls and spars of which “ he scratched” the annals “ of his own and more ancient times ;” also, of another sage or hero, who thus had recourse to his chairs, benches, and bedstead, for the means of perpetuating the memory of his own exploits.

 

The Romans, however, found out, by experience, that the materials which were apparently the most durable in their nature were far from being the best adapted for the permanent preservation of records. Of this they had a signal proof. The code known as “ The Laws of the Twelve Tables,” were kept together with other chronicles engraved on brass in the capital. By a stroke of lightning they were instantaneously destroyed, some of the plates being melted, and the inscriptions on others rendered illegible. However, the use of thin tablets, composed of wood or prepared skins, and covered with wax, was very common amongst the Romans, and continued during a long period. Not only epistolary and literary compositions were committed to these more fragile receptacles, but what we should now call official documents, as also wills, were inscribed on them. The same kinds of tablets used to be employed in the Roman schools in the instruction of youth, each scholar having his own set of implements,—one of these being the style, a small cylindrical instrument of iron, sharpened at one end and flattened at the other for convenience in making erasures. It seems that the style, in the hands of an irritable or combative person, sometimes became a dangerous weapon, since a law was passed, on account of its too frequent employment as a dagger, forbidding the use of iron styles altogether ; so that others made of bone, horn, reeds, and so forth, came to be substituted. We read, for instance, of a school-master, who appears to have goaded his disciples into active hostilities which had a tragical termination, for his scholars felled him with their tablets, and then massacred him with their styles.

 

Long after the times here alluded to, even in England, tablets and styles were in use. We read in old Chaucer's writings :

 

“ His Fellow had a staff tipped with home,

“ A paire of tables all of iverie,

“ And a Pointell polished fetouslie, (whatever this may be !)

“ And wrote alwaies the names, as he stood,

“ Of all folke that gave hem any good.”

 

I shall only allude, in passing, to the transition of those comparatively cumbrous modes into others more convenient for use, and even more useful in point of durability. The Egyptians made use of the bark of a plant which grew on the banks of the Nile, called papyrus, while the Chinese made a kind of paper with silk. In the course of time, these substances, also the prepared bark of other plants, linen, skins of quadrupeds and serpents, fashioned into parchment, came into use ; and the processes of scratching or engraving on tablets gave place to the easier art of painting or writing with different coloured liquids or inks. Of such materials, and by such means, were composed the manuscripts before and during the middle ages, comprising literature, archives, and records, up to the time when the introduction of printing, and of our present papers and inks, caused the more ancient processes to be set aside for ever.

 

Even on the subject of ancient and modern papers and inks, it would be well, in connection with the topic before us, to go into some useful details, if circumstances permitted. The papers manufactured in the present day are undoubtedly superior to those made two or three hundred years ago. The well known writer Fuller quaintly says, complaining of the preference given to foreign manufactures : “ We do not enough encourage the making of paper amongst us ; but, considering the vast sums expended in our land for paper out of Italy, France and Germany, our home-spun paper might be found beneficial. Paper participates, in some sort, of the characters of the country which makes it,—the Venetian being neat, subtile and court-like ; the French, light, slight and slender ; the Dutch, thick, corpulent and gross, sucking up the ink with the sponginess thereof.”

 

But whatever may be the relative merits of the papers used at different periods, the composition of our inks is inferior to that of our forefathers. Modern records, in this respect, do not compare favorably with those made many hundred years ago. Having had occasion, during the last few years, to inspect written documents, including some despatches prepared in England and sent out to this country, and other records or copies written in Canada within the last hundred years, I have been struck by the indistinctness of many. Some, not even forty years old, present a pale, faded appearance, owing undoubtedly to the use of poor ink. On the other hand, persons who have had an opportunity in London of inspecting some of the ancient Saxon manuscripts, and the rolls and records which have been preserved of the period from the year 400 to the 12th century, see that the written characters are bright and clear, and in the finest state of preservation; while, in this respect, there is a great falling-off in records belonging to the 15th, 16th and subsequent centuries. That ancient register of the lands of England, called the " Domes-day Book," prepared by the order of William the Conqueror, bears as the date of its completion, 1086. The first volume, a large folio of 382 pages, written in the same hand, in double column on each page, and the second, a quarto of 450 pages, single column, are both preserved to this day in their pristine freshness, fair and legible as when first written. Sir Francis Palgrave, formerly the Deputy-Keeper of Records, says of Domes-day Book : “ In early times, precious as it was always deemed, it occasionally travelled like other records, to distant parts. Till 1496, it was usually kept with the King's Seal at Westminster, with other valuable records, under three locks and keys, in charge of the auditor, chamberlains, and deputy-chamberlains of the Exchequer. In that year it was deposited in the Chapter-House at Westminster, in a vaulted porch never warmed by fire. From its first deposit in the Treasury at Winchester, in the reign of the Conqueror, it never felt or saw a fire ; yet, every page is bright, sound, and perfect.”

 

It has been reasonably suggested that the less durable quality of modern inks, compared with those employed in writing the earlier records, is dependent on the neglect to use, in their composition, ingredients calculated to resist destruction by air and moisture. They are the same with respect to certain colouring matters and gum ; but whereas modern inks have usually been made up with nut-galls, sulphate of iron, and gum, those more anciently used consisted chiefly of carbon, in the forms of soot and ivory-black—that is, of materials, under ordinary conditions, indestructible.

 

It would certainly be worth our while, if it were possible on this occasion, to advert to numerous other points connected with the various modes resorted to in times past for making up and preserving the records of memorable events. But, however minutely this were done, the inevitable conclusion would be that, as regards mere materials, paper and ink are, in almost every point of view, preferable to all others that have been ever employed or thought of—more generally convenient for use, cheaper, more easily set in order and preserved, more easily searched, consulted, and replaced. We must admit that a light fabric derived from linen rags, with written characters inscribed, is, substantially, of a far more perishable nature than stone, clay, metal, and several of the other materials anciently used, and still appropriately resorted to, for certain kinds of memorials. Yet, the facilities which have just been indicated, and, above all, the means of multiplying copies to any extent which we possess in the Printing Press, now place mankind in a position to guard, if they will, against all known sources of accident, decay, and destruction.

 

III.—I shall now revert, for a brief space, to tradition, or oral communication, including what has been commonly styled hearsay, of which I have already spoken as a peculiar sort of Archive or fundamental source of information. We sometimes meet with persons who, because they have figured as actors in past transactions, or because they have derived their cognizance of these, at second hand, as it were, from conversation with others who did personally participate, set at nought all such accounts as do not square with their own views. It depends, I need scarcely say, much upon the nature of the transactions themselves how far evidence of that kind can be received as reliable, even when we have to deal with persons of undoubted veracity, intelligence, and freedom from undue prejudice. We may accept it readily enough in cases where an isolated fact, or single series of facts, is concerned. But if the case be that of a battle, a rebellion, or a course of important events implying the occurrence of many distinct incidents and the co-operation of many different actors, the oral testimony of any one is really valuable only so far as it serves to assist in filling up a part of the outline embracing a narrative of all the facts. When the Duke of Wellington, shortly after the battle of Waterloo, was written to for information by a gentleman who stated his intention to write a complete history of that great conflict, he replied as follows : “ The object which you propose to yourself is very difficult of attainment. The history of a battle is not unlike the history of a ball. Some individuals may recollect the little events of which the great result is the battle won or lost ; but no individual can recollect the order in which, or the exact moment at which, they occurred, which makes all the difference as to their value or importance…” The suggestion contained in this reply is obviously applicable in a great many cases of individual testimony of the sort now adverted to. One's own personal experience or participation in a series of events may aid in correcting misstatements on certain points ; but, to be of substantial and permanent value, a written record should be made at the time of or soon after their occurrence. To delay making that record until, perhaps, years have elapsed, or to leave it for a future generation to supply, is to weaken the character of such evidence, and cause it to assume more or less that of mere rumour.

 

In offering these last observations, I have had in view more particularly the difficulties which must encompass any attempts at present to get at the correct history of events which have transpired in this country during the past fifty or sixty years, until at least all the available written and printed records are looked up, collected and arranged, and their evidence sifted, as well as weighed in conjunction with the conflicting testimony of eyewitnesses and participators still living or recently deceased. If, however, we limit our ideas of the nature of tradition as consisting of oral testimony transmitted from father to son, or from individuals of one generation to those of another, we have numerous instances in the history of Canada, as well as that of other countries, shewing its uncertain character when not supported by written records. Believing this to be a point of some moment in connection with our leading subject, I cite one or two examples.

 

We have a fair instance in English History of the account to which traditional evidence might have been turned if it were in all cases good for much. It is that of the Parr family. Thomas Parr was born in 1483, and lived till 1635, attaining to the prodigious age of 152 years. He had a son who died at 113, a grandson who lived to be 110, and a great-grandson who died on September 21st, 1757, aged 124 years. The period between the birth of Thomas Parr and the death of his great-grandson, Robert, comprehended the space of 274 years. But old Parr, when he was brought to London in 1635, to be presented to King Charles I., although then in good health, and in full possession of his mental faculties, seems to have had very little to impart respecting the events which had occurred in the course of his protracted life ; nor are we informed that any of his long-lived descendants ever contributed anything to the existing stock of knowledge. Thomas, however, seems to have been quite uneducated and illiterate ; and if the same were the case with his descendants down to Robert, the great-grandson, we might, perhaps, be allowed to infer that defective intelligence was a cause of the loss of so fair an opportunity of illustrating the nature and value of oral tradition. Nor do we find in Canadian History that the stock of knowledge was substantially increased by the aged Iroquois woman who is reported to have come on a visit to Quebec about the year 1742, when she was 138 years old. This venerable person is said to have afforded, by her visit, immense gratification to the inmates of the Ursuline convent, who beheld in her one who was of mature age when Champlain ruled in Canada, and who, they judged, must have received from eye-witnesses belonging to her own tribe accounts of the first arrival of their foundress, Madame de la Peltrie, as well as of many other remarkable persons and incidents connected with the rise and growth of the Canadian Colony under the rule of no less than seventeen successive governors. It is reasonable to conclude that, considering she was a savage, and acquainted with all that was known of the past to her own people, she must have been an intelligent woman, and well able to make interesting disclosures. But if she did, these have not been placed on record.

 

Some time since, on the occasion of a visit to the General Hospital, I made use of an opportunity of conversing with one of the aged inmates of that institution. She appeared to be in possession of her mental faculties ; and as she professed to remember incidents which occurred upwards of 80 years ago, I interrogated her on the subject of what have been styled “ the dark days of Canada.” One of these was Sunday, October 16th, 1785, and the two others the 2nd and 3rd of July, 1814. She said she recollected them, and that there had been an interval of about 30 years between the first and last. Finding her statement, so far, as correct as could be expected, I proceeded to question her further as to particulars. But I failed to elicit any other definite information, except the mention that she thought she was in fear on those occasions. Considering that the recorded phenomena of those dark days were remarkable enough to make a strong impression on the minds of the most ignorant persons, occasioning general alarm, and that the accompaniments of the first, such as the lighting-up of the churches and private houses in the day-time, might have been impressed on her memory, I was not prepared to find, as I did, that she recollected none of the particulars.

 

Quite of a different nature from the foregoing cases were those of the two well-known gentlemen named Thompson, father and son, of whom the latter, at an advanced age, died in Quebec last year. Mr. Thompson, senior, had been present with Gen. Wolf at the first battle of the Plains, in the year 1759 ; and from the time of the occupation of the city by the British troops, in the autumn of that year, had remained a resident of it until his death, in 1830. In 1776, when Montgomery fell in an attempt to capture the place by assault, he superintended the interment of that general's remains. Forty-two years later, when he was about eighty years old, and when the widow of Montgomery reclaimed those remains, he was able, in the most perfect manner, to recall to mind all the particulars necessary for identifying the place of burial and for superintending the disinterment. Numerous other particulars, to the point, might be mentioned ; but as they are all very well known, there is no occasion for me to pass beyond an allusion to them. But I may be permitted to offer a comment. The circumstances of the case of Mr. Thompson shew what oral tradition might do for history if only the narrators proved to be persons of irreproachable integrity, good judgment, of cultivated minds, and active mental and bodily qualities, with the additional important advantage of having passed long lives amidst scenes calculated to perpetually freshen their memories and to remind them continually of even the minor incidents concerned.

 

In closing this portion of my subject, I cannot forbear referring to a somewhat remarkable instance of traditionary calumny and misapprehension being completely refuted by means of a recourse to official documentary evidence. At the siege of Quebec, in 1759, an officer named Montgomery was concerned in certain proceedings held to be, even in time of war, inexcusable, on account of their atrocity. As a consequence, his name and the memory of the man became odious. During a long period of time subsequently, it was generally supposed that Richard Montgomery, who fell, as has been stated already, at the assault of the city on the morning of January 1st, 1776, was that same officer. Nevertheless, that was not the universal conviction. A gentleman, resident in Upper Canada, addressed an (application to the War-office in England, in order to ascertain, if possible, what regiments were serving in America in 1759, their stations, and whether a Capt. Richard Montgomery had been one of the officers among those on duty at Quebec. The result was a search among the Archives of the War-office, and, in due time, an official reply to the application that had been sent from Canada. This shewed that there were, in that year, two officers named Montgomery serving with their regiments in America, of whom the one named Richard Mongtomery belonged to a regiment then with General Amherst's forces at Lake Champlain. The other Montgomery—whether or not a brother of Richard, as some have supposed, is uncertain— was at the same time serving in one of the regiments under Wolfe, at Quebec. It was further stated, in the official reply, that the said Richard Montgomery, some years afterwards, while his regiment was still in America, but before the commencement of the revolutionary war in 1775, sold his commission and retired from the service. In short, the Richard Montgomery who thus retired from the British army, and who settled down in America, transferring his allegiance to the United States, and who afterwards perished at Quebec, in 1776, was not the man whose name and memory merited those odious imputations ; but, under a misapprehension of the real facts, he had been mistaken for another officer whose sirname was the same as his. I think it right to mention that a copy of the letter intimating these facts was communicated to me by one of the vice-presidents, Mr. LeMoine, of whom I suspected at the time, and have done so ever since, that he had himself been mainly instrumental in thus rescuing the character of an innocent man from the odium so long resting upon his memory.

 

IV.—A complete collection of the Canadian Archives would embrace an enormous quantity of records now scattered in localities very distant from each other, and of which many, perhaps the most valuable, are not the property of the Province. To obtain access to them, it would be necessary to go to the capitals of several of the neighbouring States, especially to Albany, Boston, Philadelphia, and Washington. We should be obliged to go to Halifax, to the British Museum and depositories of Archives at London, and to Paris.

 

To the methods of dealing with the public records in some of those places, I shall have occasion to refer. As regards the documents themselves, however, their nature and contents, my observations will be confined as much as possible to Archives actually held in the Province and belonging to it. But, in truth, owing to various causes, and, amongst these, to the former migratory character of our Governments and Parliaments, and, partly, to the recent establishment of the Constitution of the Dominion, it is yet impossible to pronounce what we really have in the shape of Archives, or to point out precisely the localities in which they are lodged. Besides those to be found at the several existing seats of Government, there is a very considerable mass of them at Montreal, and, probably, some remaining at Kingston.

 

With respect to the Archives of the Colony, of periods antecedent to the year 1764, we may infer some particulars of their nature, and how they were disposed of, by consulting the Articles of Capitulation, dated Sept. 8th, 1760. In seven or eight of these, we find stipulations proposed by De Vaudreuil in behalf of what are concisely styled “ papers.” De Vaudreuil demands that those in his own possession and that of General de Levis and Intendant Bigot, as also the Colonial Government papers and those belonging to the several public departments, shall be transported to France, without previous inspection by British officers, under any pretext whatever. In article 45, it is stipulated, on the contrary, that certain documents shall be suffered to remain behind in the offices where they had been customarily kept—these documents being the Registers and papers of the Supreme Council ; those of the Provost and Marine Office at Quebec ; those belonging to the Royal Jurisdictions of Three Rivers and Montreal ; the Seigniorial papers ; the Notarial Deeds lodged in the towns and villages; and, generally, all Records concerning the estates and property of individuals. Amherst grants the stipulation of article 45, in full. The other stipulations about the papers of De Vaudreuil and the chief officers he also agrees to, with two reservations—namely : 1st, that all Archives necessary for conducting the government of the country be excepted ; and 2nd, that the Marquis de Vaudreuil and all officers, of whatever rank, hand over to the British authorities, in good faith, all plans and maps of the country.

 

From these particulars we may infer that a large number of Archives must have been removed from the colony to France on the departure of the last French governor with his officers and troops, in the autumn of 1760, but that a very large quantity must have remained behind. However important it might seem to obtain detailed information of all the ancient Records included in General Amherst's exceptions, it is matter of doubt whether any official or other person in this country is at present in a position to furnish it. But we cannot say the same of the Archives of the Supreme Council or some other public Records mentioned in No. 45 of the Articles of Capitulation. In the years 1854 and 1855, three valuable sets were printed and published at the public expense, consisting of the Royal Edicts and Ordinances concerning Canada from 1627 to 1756, the enactments of the Supreme Council since its establishment in 1663, and the Ordinances and Judgments of the Royal Intendants of Canada from 1663 to 1758. We have, besides, in printed form, probably all that the most zealous Archaeologist would now care to study on the subject of the Seigniorial Tenure, a result for which 1 believe the public is indebted to the laborious researches and professional ability of the honorable gentleman who acted as counsel for the Seigneurs before the tribunal which adjudicated on their claims.

 

It would take us into too wearisome details to discuss further, or in any manner commensurate with its importance, the subject of the old Archives of Canada—that is, those which relate to its affairs prior to the capitulation in 1760. Most of the original documents left behind in the country in that year, are, I believe, in the custody of one of the Departments of State at Ottawa. I further believe that in the prosecution of its legitimate functions, this Society would do well to renew its inquiries into this matter, with a view to obtaining certain and complete information on all points appertaining to it.

 

Of the Canadian Archives relating to affairs of dates subsequent to that of the cession of the Colony to England, and extending to the epoch of Confederation, I consider it safe to say that they are in a position even less accessible than the Records of anterior periods. It is probable the ancient French public papers which may remain in the country would be found to be so far sorted and properly labelled as to require no very large amount of expense and labour in procuring catalogues of them. We cannot, however, say this of the later Archives. It has been already stated that a considerable mass of them is lodged at Montreal—some, but I believe no considerable portion of the whole, being sorted, put in bundles, and labelled, though there is reason for doubting whether the terms of endorsation on each packet are suitable for all the papers within. Those which are sorted and labelled bear dates beginning with the year 1764. In some of the upper shelves and partitions, bundles of documents and loose papers are to be seen unsorted ; and it is impossible, without examination, to pronounce upon the nature of their contents, or whether, as regards their dates, they correspond with the labelled

documents nearest to them. In other receptacles and places, on shelves, tables, and in large boxes or cases, are multitudes of documents, papers, engrossed sheets, petitions, addresses, printed leaves and books, and some bound volumes of manuscript. An inspection of some of these latter gives the impression that their statistical and other contents are of considerable value, and that they are well worthy of being catalogued, with a summary of their nature, if not to be printed in full. What the contents of several large cases may be must remain matter of conjecture until they are opened, and the documents within examined and sorted. On taking up a loose sheet in the upper part of an open case, it was seen to be an engrossed copy of an address, prepared, I believe, at Three Rivers, in the year 1787. In the same case were many other papers, some in the form of rolls, others written on foolscap, which from their appearance were judged to appertain to a variety of subjects and dates. The whole of the matters which I have thus summarily adverted to are contained in vaults underneath the old Government House at Montreal. I was informed by the worthy keeper, Mr. David Luck,—who has been in attendance there upon Governors and Cabinet Ministers, and in charge of Records, since the days of Sir George Prévost, and who, I was gratified to learn, has just been handsomely pensioned off by the Dominion Government,—that the vaults were usually musty and damp, and scarcely safe for the purposes of search, without the use of a stove. I gathered, in fact, from his remarks, that at least two persons had accelerated their premature decease by too assiduously prosecuting there the work of searching for documents and sorting old papers. Considering the risks of fire, and the probability of an irreparable loss, which the members of this Society are well able to appreciate, the circumstances I have mentioned will not seem to be unworthy of their notice. Upon the whole, and in the interest of literature and the history of our country, as well as for other reasons not necessary to be stated on this occasion, I cannot forbear expressing my conviction of the advantages that would be secured if it should be found practicable to turn to account the organization of the Society in regard to these Archives.

 

V.—I had intended to close my present paper with some remarks which I thought might prove indirectly useful in our own case, or, at least, not likely to prove unacceptable, in relation to modes of dealing with Archives elsewhere ; but the length to which the foregoing have extended reminds me that I must now do this far more briefly than I could desire if time permitted.

(1.)  The regular fyling away of official documents received and of copies of official correspondence, as practised in all our public departments, followed by the publication of annual reports, leads to the rapid accumulation of public records, of the nature of Archives. These, together with the Bills Acts, and Returns to Parliamentary Addresses, amount, in the course of every few years, to an unmanageable mass of documents, unless there be at the same time a convenient system providing for their safe custody, and facilities of access to them for search and for future reference.

 

(2.)  I have understood that the means of attaining these objects in France are as perfect as they could be expected under a quasi-despotic form of government. This Society has already profited by those opportunities, so as to find and obtain copies of many valuable papers amongst the French Archives relating to the early History of Canada. Not being sufficiently familiar with the details, I will not occupy time with further allusion to the French system.

 

(3.)   In England, the Public Records were formerly dispersed in upwards of sixty different places. Within a few years past, a vast building has been erected in London for the reception of them all. It contains more than two hundred distinct apartments, affording space for more than half a million cubic feet of documents, and accommodation not merely for existing records, but also for all that are expected to accrue in the course of the next half-century. The building is fire-proof throughout, and the whole under the charge of an official styled “ Master of the Rolls.” He receives from the various Departments of State, the Parliament, Courts of Common Law, of Chancery, the Admiralty, and many others, Records above twenty years old. All are catalogued for convenience of reference, and any person may make a search and copy extracts on payment of a small fee ; but a bona-fide literary inquirer can obtain searches and copies of documents in pencil without any charge, provided he can satisfy the deputy-keeper that his purpose is really of a literary nature. The extent to which .this privilege is appreciated by literary persons is wonderful, it being not uncommon for a single individual to consult four or five thousand documents within one year. Such is the excellence of the arrangements, that only a very few minutes elapse before an applicant's demand is complied with, whatever be the nature and date of the document required.

 

There is also in London a distinct establishment for preserving Wills, called Doctors' Commons. The original wills are required to be deposited here before they can be legally administered to by executors. These date from the year 1483 down to the present time ; but there are copies of still older instruments beginning with 1383. Any person, for a small fee, may procure the perusal of a will, the search for it being completed at half an hour's notice—usually within a few minutes. A longer notice is necessary when a copy is required. In a year, the number of searches approaches to 30,000, and applications for copies and extracts to nearly 10,000 more. The structure is fire-proof, and the arrangements such as always to secure perfect copies.

 

The facts here stated will suffice to shew that the public records in England are made strictly public property, and that most efficient systems have been adopted for securing safe custody as well as all necessary facilities for search and reference. Yet, an authority already cited says : “ The Records of this country have no equal in the civilized world, in antiquity, continuity, variety, extent, or amplitude of facts and details. From Domes-day they contain the whole materials for our history—civil, religious, political, social, moral or material, from the Norman conquest to the present day.”

 

(4.) In the United States, the public records of the several States of the Union are placed in charge of the State Librarians, who are liberally compensated. The documents, as they accumulate from year to year, are suitably numbered and placed, so as to be convenient for future access and reference. A catalogue of them is printed annually. Any person, on application, can obtain access to them, whether for perusal or copying. There is no charge for making a search. In the separate States there are no distinct collections of departmental Archives, for the public documents of every department are handed over to the custody of the State Librarians. In Washington, each department keeps its own records, while those appertaining to the whole United States are placed in the custody of officials acting under the authority of the President himself. The arrangements for security and for convenient reference are staled to be of a very perfect nature ; but no national document relating to the whole of the States can be procured for the purpose of perusal or copying without the President's order.

 

(5.) In Nova Scotia, action was taken in 1857, with a view to ascertaining the nature and contents of the Archives of that Province. The Hon. Jos. Howe moved for an address to the Governor, “ to cause the ancient records and documents illustrative of the history and progress of society in the Province to be examined, preserved and arranged, for reference or publication, as the Legislature might determine, and that the House would provide for the same.” In 1858 and the following year, further steps "were taken to procure from England and from Canada copies of any despatches that might be needed for completing the Nova Scotian fyles. In the course of subsequent years, more than 200 volumes of manuscripts were selected, arranged, catalogued, and bound.

 

The next step was to authorize the preparation and publication of a volume containing selections of such of the Archives as should be deemed to possess the greatest historical value. Last year, under the auspices of the Commissioner of the Nova Scotian Public Records, the volume, consisting of 755 pages, was brought out.

 

The work is of a truly interesting character. Its contents cover the period from 1714 to 1760, divided into five principal portions, with an elaborate index. I will not undertake to describe it ; nor would this be necessary, for, through the good offices of the President of this Society, who, I understand, is an intimate friend of the compiler of the work, members are enabled to judge for themselves, since copies of it are to be found on the shelves of the Library.

 

It only remains for me to crave indulgence for the imperfections of this paper, which, owing to unavoidable circumstances, was prepared with more haste than the importance of its subject would appear to warrant.