Page:The Cambridge History of American Literature, v2.djvu/125

 Hildreth. Palfrey 109 the book is a failure, but for one who enjoys a solid pre- sentation of facts it has merit. Few other men have written down so many statements of fact in so small a compass with such great reliability. In the preface Hildreth said that he wished to describe the fathers of the nation as they were, unbedaubed with patriotic rouge, wrapped up in no fine-spun cloaks of excuses and apologies, without stilts, buskins, tinsel, or bedizzen- ment, in their own proper persons, often rude, hard, narrow, super- stitious and mistaken, but always earnest, downright, manly, and sincere. The result of their labours is eulogy enough; their best apology is to tell the story as it was. There can be no doubt that the author tried in aU honesty to carry out his purpose. "We encounter [in Hildreth]," said The Edinburgh Review, "the muse of American history descended from her stump, and recounting her narrative in a key adapted to our own ears." An historian who did not Hberate himself entirely from patriotic bias was John Gorham Palfrey (1798-1881). Al- though he falls shghtly without the limits of time assigned to this chapter, he was by nature and purpose a member of what has been called the "filio-pietistic" group. Bred a Unitarian minister, and pastor for a time of Brattle Square Church, Boston, he served as Dexter Professor of Sacred Literature in Harvard University (1830-39). From 1836 to 1843 he was editor of The North American Review. He held several poHtical offices in his State, and was a member of Congress in 1847- 49. From 1861 to 1867 he was postmaster of Boston. He wrote many tracts, religious, political, and historical. Never- theless, he kept true to his love for the history of New England. In 1858-64 he brought out in three volumes a History of New England during the Stuart Dynasty. It won instant re- cognition and the author followed up his success with two more volumes, History of New England from the Revolution of the 17th Century to the Revolution of the i8th (1875-90). The two parts were later shorn of their most irrelevant passages and issued as a Compendious History of New England in four handy volumes. So far as the mere statement of facts goes, it is safe to say that Palfrey has given us a complete and suflS- cient history of colonial New England. He has not been