Page:American Historical Review vol. 6.djvu/158

148 Spain for intervention in Mexico for the purpose of securing a settlement of their claims, the determination of Napoleon III to establish an empire in Mexico which caused the retirement of the other powers, the policy of the United States and the negotiations which resulted in the withdrawal of the French forces and the collapse of the government of Maximilian are told of in an interesting way. The greater part of the chapter on the Monroe Doctrine is taken up with a sketch of the Venezuelan question. In a summary of "the policy of the United States in reference to arbitration of American questions" the statement is made that "in disputes between American States it (the United States) insists that they be settled without calling in the aid of European powers." If this means, as it seems to mean, that it is the policy of this government not to allow a European power to arbitrate in a dispute between two American states, it would certainly be an extraordinary and arbitrary development of the Monroe Doctrine. No such view has been taken by the United States. For example, one of the most important questions which has arisen between two South American republics since the war between Chile and Peru, has been the frontier question between Chile and the Argentine Republic. Several times within the last fifteen years these two states have been on the verge of war. In 1897 a treaty was negotiated submitting the matter to Queen Victoria for arbitration. The arbitration was accepted and the question is now awaiting decision.

McLoughlin and Old Oregon: A Chronicle. By. (Chicago: A. C. McClurg and Co. 1900. Pp. viii, 382).

the latest writers in the prolific field of the Northwest is Mrs. Eva Emery Dye, who has presented us a chronicle of old Oregon, with Dr. John McLoughlin as the central figure. There could hardly be a more interesting combination, and Mrs. Dye has brought out the salient features, to the point of being spectacular. The impression left upon the general reader is very similar to that received from a drama. But the student of history, however the action in the play may entertain him, regrets the mingling of fiction with historical truth in a work which is likely to be mistaken for a wholly serious one. Mrs. Dye refrains from referring to her authorities, although she uses with great freedom all those who are well known, and many of which no account is given. This method leaves her free to put her characters on the stage in any picturesque dress or attitude which she may choose. Where this irresponsibility deals only with the purely romantic it is in a degree pardonable, since it enhances the attractiveness of the book. But when, either by assertion or by implication, it leads the reader to believe that which is essentially erroneous it becomes mischievous.

Mrs. Dye holds a facile pen, which is directed by a lively imagination, qualities which the public writer must possess, and which the present reckless period in literature to a large degree demands. There is a great deal of romantic truth in Oregon history, the simple verity of which