Page:American Historical Review, Volume 12.djvu/686

 676 Reviews of Books markable freedom from any appearance of prejudice or bias in favor of any particular theory or opinion. The two sides of the great con- troversy are set forth with justice and an even hand. In all history opinions, sentiments, and beliefs hold a leading place. The historian who deals with political parties deals pre-eminently with that part of public opinion which is continually under controversy. Political parties are the organs for the formulation of conflicting opinions, and their consideration is therefore fraught with peculiar difficulties. The subject-matter itself forestalls agreement. The his- torian, however thorough and impartial, is certain to advance opin- ions which others will not accept. To criticize in such a case is often simply to express a contrary opinion. Comparing chapters 11. and iii. (in which the notion of the finality of the compromises of 1850 is discussed) with other parts of the book, one gets the impression that the idea of finality is over-emphasized. The author indeed supports his view by apt quotations from news- papers, from the speeches of statesmen, from the utterances of con- ventions and the results of elections; yet in these chapters no mention is made of Uncle Tom's Cabin and its influence upon the general con- troversy. In an entirely different connection, on page 281, that work is mentioned, and we are told that " it achieved an unparalleled success from the start, edition after edition being absorbed by a public gone wild over the humor and the tragedy of the work." This was the situation at the time when the doctrine of the finality of the compromises was being assiduously preached, and a public gone mad over Uncle Tom's Cabin was not in a state of mind to accept the Fugitive-Slave Law as a final settlement of the national dispute. Our author is eminently fair in his treatment of the South, though the parts of the book dealing with that section exhibit less complete information than do other portions. The union sentiment in the South is recognized, but not so fully as it deserves to be, while the anti- slavery sentiment which existed in the slave states is almost wholly ignored. Helper's Impending Crisis is disposed of in a few lines which describe the book as " an anomaly ", and the statement is made that it entirely failed to turn the non-slaveholding whites against the slave- holders. Why did it fail ? The book threw the slaveholding leaders into a frenzy. John Sherman, when candidate for the speakership of the House of Representatives, was defeated because he had inad- vertently lent his name to encourage its circulation. A Southern con- gressman declared that such a man was not only not fit for Speaker, he was not fit to live. Surely Southern slaveholders believed that The Im- pending Crisis would turn non-slaveholding whites against them if they should ba allowed to read it. These slight criticisms are intended rather to call attention to the difficulty which any author must encounter who writes on controversial politics than to characterize the work as a whole. Tiie book is worthy of high commendation.