 | Second Annual Report of the Archivist, Library of the University of Virginia, for the Year 1931-32 |  |
Second Annual Report of the Archivist, University of
Virginia Library, for the Year 1931-32
THE survey and collection of manuscript materials in Virginia,
now completing the second year of work, have followed the general
method of procedure outlined in the first discussion of the
project,[1]
and the list of new counties to be covered, as indicated on the
map published in last year's report,[2]
has varied only slightly in the
actual execution of the program. By geographic divisions, the following
counties have been surveyed during the year:
In Tidewater—Isle of Wight, Norfolk, Stafford, and York.
In the Piedmont—Goochland and Orange.
In the Valley—Augusta and Botetourt.
In Southwestern Virginia—Washington.
Isle of Wight County was substituted for Surry because of personal
connections which facilitated the work; Brunswick and Lancaster were
omitted temporarily because of other duties, and will be included in the
list for the coming year.
The survey made thus far in county archives scattered throughout
the State has netted a fair sample of the local official records and has
demonstrated the value of contacts with interested people who have
helped to give publicity to the project in areas remote from the University.
The inventory of county records has brought to light much
forgotten material, such as lists of free negroes, public school records,
and vital statistics for the period 1853-70. The city archives of the
Norfolk Corporation Court contain some interesting volumes on eighteenth
century ships and cargoes arriving in port; and research in the
Norfolk Council records is greatly simplified by the detailed name and
subject index compiled by the clerk. The United States District Court
(in Norfolk) for the Eastern District of Virginia has fragmentary
records before 1865, while its papers of bankruptcy and admiralty cases
are among the most valuable for recent years.
In contrast to the listing of official records, which in the case of each
political unit is a perfectly concrete task, the compiling of data on
private and non-governmental organizations opens an almost limitless
the custodians of a wide variety of minute books, account books, and
miscellaneous papers of churches, charitable societies, business houses,
etc. It has been found, on the whole, that correspondence yields a
meager return of information; yet, in the case of lodge records, the
element of secrecy and the vast number of local chapters suggested the
advisability of negotiating with them by letter sanctioned by the central
officers. Accordingly, with the approval of the Grand Lodge, a
brief questionnaire[3] was mailed (with stamped return envelope) to all
locals of the Independent Order of Odd Fellows. The thirty per cent
reply received indicated that this method may well be pursued with
similar organizations. A follow-up questionnaire, practically identical
with the first, was restricted to lodges antedating 1900, from whom no
response had come. Data on the Masonic records are being compiled
by the Grand Lodge of Virginia, whose Grand Secretary has offered to
provide the University with a copy of his findings. Furthermore, the
library of the Grand Lodge in Richmond, with its fireproof vault, has
become a depository for manuscript records which will be included in
the present inventory.
Most church records are in the hands of the clerks or ministers of
the individual churches scattered throughout the State, and the old
registers and minute books have experienced the perennial hazards of
neglect and destruction in passing from one generation to another. In
comparing the number of original records before 1900 preserved by the
four largest denominations in Virginia (Baptist, Methodist Episcopal,
Presbyterian, and Protestant Episcopal), it is interesting to note that
the Methodist has hitherto ranked lowest proportionally as well as in
absolute numbers. This striking paucity of source material prompted
the archivist to urge certain officials to call the attention of the Virginia
Conference to the matter,[4]
with the result that that body, at its
annual session in October, 1931, authorized the creation of a Methodist
Historical Society. When its organization is completed, it will provide
a depository for all non-current Methodist records in the area of this
conference, and will take steps to collect such records. Meanwhile, the
committee has approved of the archivist's suggestion that the district
conferences name local depositories for the temporary safe-keeping of
their books, and, as a first step, the Charlottesville District Conference,
in May, 1932, accepted the invitation to place its records on file in the
coming year, both the Baltimore and the Holston Conference which
include large areas in Virginia, will follow the lead of the Virginia
Conference along this line.
The other three denominations mentioned above have their own
archives in Richmond, and during the past year all their manuscripts
were listed for inclusion in the inventory. Most notable is the collection
of original church and association minute books in the Virginia
Baptist Historical Society[5]
which also has an excellent file of pamphlets
and printed annual reports. The Virginia Diocesan Library of
the Episcopal Church[6]
has recently collected some manuscript books
and papers of the early church and clergy, but most of the extant parish
registers and vestry books are on deposit in the Archives Department
of the Virginia State Library. At Union Theological Seminary[7]
the
Presbyterian Church has a valuable collection of session minutes, church
registers, and minute books of Virginia presbyteries, in process of being
catalogued, and it is hoped that the Seminary library will be increasingly
recognized as the proper depository for Virginia Presbyterian
records.
The inventory of newspaper files throughout the State,[8]
including
those in editors' offices, will very probably be completed during the
coming year, and, if funds are available, this material may well be
published as Part I of the proposed Guide to historical sources in Virginia.
A second questionnaire to those editors who had not responded
to the first, raised the percentage of replies from 30 to 40; the remainder
are being obtained by personal interview. The value of the list is
enhanced by a number of files discovered in private hands, some of
which have been transferred to the University of Virginia. The information
as compiled will include, as far as possible, the names of the
editors, dates of establishment, consolidation, and discontinuance, and
frequency of issue.
The collection of manuscripts for the University library, carried on
in conjunction with the survey, is a long-time task, the returns of which
are cumulative. The increasing advantage of making the work known
throughout the State cannot be over-estimated. Several individuals,
because of their genuine interest in historical matters, have been most
to which the archivist could have gained access in no other
manner. To further the publicity of the work, an article by the archivist
on "The Making and Preserving of Virginia History" was published[9]
and widely circulated. It was a popular presentation of the
origin, preservation, and loss of historical records, and the present
project of the University. Subsequent editorial comments and letters
from individuals have indicated a real appreciation of the need for the
work.
Among the most valuable collections placed on deposit in the University
library during 1931-32 are the Anderson Papers from Lexington,
Virginia, dealing with politics, agriculture, iron, and other manufactures,
1785-1919; the Heth Papers of Mr. Charles R. Kennon, treating of the
Richmond coal industry, politics, and social conditions, 1785-1870; the
Tayloe Papers from "Mount Airy" (Richmond County), "Powhatan"
(King George County), Washington, D. C., and Latin America, on
national and local politics, diplomatic relations, agriculture, and general
social conditions, 1756-1893. From "Powhatan", as a gift to the University,
came also the library of the family begun over a century ago.
A small collection of Tate Papers from Pittsylvania County throw
light upon public education in Virginia during the third quarter of the
nineteenth century; the Patterson Papers and the Early Papers are of
general historical interest on the ante bellum period; from the Breckinridge
Family came an interesting detailed discussion of administrative
policies of the University, ca. 1827. Business records include account
books of general stores in Fluvanna, Surry, and Pittsylvania counties;
a grist mill in Augusta County; drug stores in Smithfield and Waynesboro;
a lumber milling company in Danville; a flour mill in Staunton;
and an old tobacco shipment record from the Rappahannock River
(early 18th century). Unique among the gifts are eighteen letters
from Thomas Jefferson to Gen. John Hartwell Cocke concerning the
establishment of the University, 1813-1826, and Jefferson's specifications
and drawings for the first buildings of the University, presented
by a prominent alumnus, William Andrews Clark, Jr., of Los Angeles.
Where unpublished historical sketches of families, churches, lodges,
etc., have been found, copies have been obtained for the University
library. The acquisition of ephemeral pamphlet material of all kinds
as well as periodic reports of official and semi-public bodies have considerably
and newspapers, mentioned above, have increased the library's facilities
for research.
The new counties in which the survey and collection of materials
will be carried on next year are:
In Tidewater—Gloucester, Lancaster, Surry, and Westmoreland.
In the Piedmont—Amherst, Cumberland, and Fauquier.
In Southside Virginia—Brunswick and Charlotte.
In the Valley—Shenandoah.
In Southwestern Virginia—Montgomery and Russell.
In no county already visited, however, is the task really completed.
Negotiations remaining open in almost every case add to the complexity
of the project as a whole and reduce the time available for the work in
new areas.
The desire of the University to promote a cooperative spirit in the
collection of manuscripts was emphasized when the present project
began.[10]
Preservation of historical materials is the primary need and
this point has been stressed in presenting the subject to members of the
Virginia Library Association at its meeting in October, 1931, and to
countless individuals who may prefer to place their manuscripts in
some depository other than the University. The cooperative idea has
been demonstrated practically in the relations between the University
and the National Monument Commission at Yorktown, the Virginia
Baptist Historical Society, and the Union Theological Seminary; and
the cordial reception which the archivist has enjoyed in visiting libraries
throughout the State is evidence of interest on their part in this promotion
of research.
In order that its manuscripts may be available for use, the University
library has provided facilities in its Virginia Room for their
filing and cataloguing. For preservation is only the first step, to be
followed as soon as possible by the repair and scientific arrangement
of the manuscripts to insure accessibility for research. The excellent
work of Miss Frances Harshbarger, curator of the University's collection,
deserves unqualified praise.
The archivist notes with great interest that a similar project for the
survey and collection of manuscript sources was begun in western
Pennsylvania in September, 1931, under the joint auspices of the Historical
with Dr. Solon J. Buck in charge; and that another for New
York state has recently been sponsored by the New York Historical
Association, to begin in July, 1932. Furthermore, an effort has been
made by the Committee on Public Administration of the Social Science
Research Council "during the last fifteen months to secure the cooperation
of one or more libraries in each of the states, looking towards an
intensified program of collection of public documents and related material."[11]
It is hoped that this effort will lead to the preservation of
manuscript sources as well as printed works in many of the States.
In conclusion, the archivist desires to express his appreciation for
the interest shown and the aid given by his associates among the faculty,
in the University Library, and by citizens in all parts of the State, and
especially to the University's Institute for Research in the Social Sciences,
without whose assistance the project could not have been continued.
Archivist.
| Second Annual Report of the Archivist, Library of the University of Virginia, for the Year 1931-32 | |