University of Virginia Library

Twelfth Annual Report on Historical Collections,
University of Virginia Library,
For the Year 1941-42

SINCE the preceding report in this series was published, the
United States has become a belligerent in the Second World
War. The general recognition of Sunday, December 7, 1941,
as a memorable date in American history was confirmed by the
President of the United States the following day in his message
to Congress. The formal declaration of war by Congress followed
promptly in half an hour. Living, like many earlier neutrals,
in a fool's paradise, the American people were rudely awakened
from their delusion of peaceful escape from a world at war. The
true significance of the much used term "total war," however, was
not readily understood. That lesson was to be learned partially
during the series of defeats in the first six months of belligerency,
until the marshalling of our resources and power could begin to
bear weight against the enemy. The Japanese attack ended
abruptly the period of disunity and false security. Whatever
followed was "after Pearl Harbor."

In organizing and administering American intellectual resources
for total war it was evident at once that archivists and
directors of manuscript and other research collections would play
an essential part. In national and state archives and in some
historical societies were official records of World War I which
might profitably be consulted on problems common to both wars.
The creation of new bodies of war records would present problems
of preservation and accessibility which the archivist should endeavor
to anticipate. In the field of historical manuscripts and
imprints the past twenty years had witnessed a growing appreciation
of recent and contemporary materials, many of which
acquired new interest as part of the background of America's
involvement in the world conflict. The Survey of Federal Archives
and the Historical Records Survey had provided a wealth of
information on the location and content of archival and other
source materials throughout the country. On the basis of British
experience under conditions of aerial warfare, Americans took
thought of their own cultural resources, both for their protection
and for their utilization to sustain public morale. What, then,

did custodians of these resources have to offer by way of plans
and procedure for the war effort on Monday, December 8, 1941?

In some respects archivists could give a good account of their
efforts at preparedness before Pearl Harbor. The challenge presented
to them by Dr. Waldo G. Leland in his presidential address
to the Society of American Archivists fourteen months earlier
on "The Archivist in Times of Emergency" had been met by the
Society and action taken through several committees charged with
problems of protection, administration, and collection of records in
times of stress. In October, 1941, at Hartford, Connecticut, Dr.
Leland again addressed the Society then "actively engaged in
preparations to cope with a situation that from day to day becomes
more ominous." He called attention to the undertakings of historians
and archivists in the first World War through the unofficial
National Board for Historical Service, whose activities ranged
from research, publications, and lectures on the background and
issues of the war (in co-operation with the Creel Committee on
Public Information) to the collection and preservation of war
records.[1] The far reaching effects which these activities had
had upon the outcome of the war and the peace settlement
(despite the failure of the United States to join the League of
Nations) were suggestive of opportunities for similar programs
that might be expanded if another war came. Encouraging
factors were the advancement and broadening of American
scholarship since the first World War, the establishment of the
National Archives, and the development of new techniques for
the use of research materials.

The forethought which the president of the Society of American
Archivists had urged upon its members and the work of the committees
mentioned above during the year before Pearl Harbor
brought timely results in the early months of the war. In December
"The Care of Records in a National Emergency"[2] was published,

which discussed hazards likely to affect archives, selection
of archives for protection, buildings and storage facilities, and
problems of evacuation. The Committee on the History and
Organization of Government Emergency Agencies functioned
through certain members of the National Archives staff. Their
task was to gather valuable information on these agencies of the
first World War so that the government might have the benefit
of their experience in the present crisis. The first product of this
undertaking was a "List of Federal World War Agencies, 1914-20,"
issued in February, 1942,[3] preliminary to a detailed handbook on
the same subject. Dr. Leland's address of the preceding October
aroused further interest in what had been done to record the
contemporary history of governmental departments and special
bureaus most directly concerned with the conflict. In April, 1942,
a study was published on "Historical Units of Agencies of the
First World War," by Elizabeth B. Drewry.[4] It was based upon
records in the National Archives, many of which had been salvaged
from poor storage places or at least had not been accessible
previous to their transfer to this institution. The significance of
these and other war records is well expressed by the author's
observation that "there seems reason to believe that as the historians
of the future regard the two world wars they may look upon
the first as a prelude to the second and may be able to trace a
continuous flow of ideas and policies from one to the other. The
conclusions reached, regardless of their nature, will be based on
the information furnished by the records of the two wars."[5]

A few other examples of preparedness in the fields of archives
and library collections during the ominous months of 1941 may
be cited as exceptional during this period of stalemate in public
opinion. The classification and earmarking of manuscript and
printed materials for evacuation from the Library of Congress
were completed before Pearl Harbor, thanks to the vision of
Archibald MacLeish, and in less than a month afterward the

exodus of the most valuable collections had begun.[6] Likewise
the treasures of the Folger Library were removed from Washington.
The National Archives staff made preparations to move
certain selected bodies of records into the central and safest part
of their building which is rated as the most bomb-proof structure
in the capital. During the early months of 1941 the Archives
Department of the Illinois State Library issued memoranda to
state and local custodians of official records to aid them in determining
which series should be given first consideration for protection
against destruction in time of war. Before Pearl Harbor
the Illinois Archives had likewise established priorities for possible
evacuation of records in its custody and the publication
of its plan provided helpful suggestions for other states.[7] The
efforts of the Historical Records Survey, which since 1936 had
been providing numerous series of guides and inventories to
archival and manuscript resources throughout the country, were
directed increasingly in 1941 to vital statistical and other records
needed directly in the defense program. The reduction in relief
labor, however, caused by defense and later by war activities
depleted the personnel of the Historical Records Survey. In the
spring of 1942 the project was liquidated, thus ending one of the
most interesting and productive undertakings in the realm of
scholarship, both for its long-time results and for its immediate
relation to the problem of nation-wide unemployment. The
attempts at economic and social planning during the 1930's, in
spite of all criticism, just and unjust, had provided some valuable
experience which carried over from the domestic depression to the
international crisis. But whether Americans by taking thought
could add one cubit to their stature was still subject to a variety
of interpretations as late as December 6, 1941.

In the federal government the National Resources Planning
Board embraced the field of cultural activities through its Committee
on Conservation of Cultural Resources, beginning in April
1941. In the early autumn of that year a detailed survey was

made of all materials, cultural, scientific, and historical, in the
custody of federal agencies in the District of Columbia. This
survey provided the basis for a code drafted later in co-operation
with the Federal Public Buildings Administration for protection
of buildings and their contents against air attack.[8] A fortnight
after war was declared a letter was sent to a selected person in
each state asking him to call a meeting as soon as possible and
to serve as chairman of a suggested State Committee on Conservation
of Cultural Resources composed of archivists, librarians,
museum directors, architects, structural engineers, and others to
make plans and execute them with reference to the protection of
all such resources. The national office of the CCCR provided instructions
for the guidance of the state committees and in February
published a preliminary handbook on The Protection of
Cultural Resources against the Hazards of War. It advised a
compromise between maximum use and maximum protection of
these materials in the light of European experience in strengthening
morale through the services of libraries, archival institutions,
and museums. It pointed out that "the imposition of a complete
blackout on such institutions in many cases not only deprives a
nation of sources of information vital to its military program but
dries up the wells from which the national spirit is strengthened
and replenished."[9]

In most states this appeal met with prompt response. State
committees were organized, ways and means discussed, and preliminary
plans put into execution. Emphasis varied considerably
from tentative plans to detailed programs of surveys of buildings,
evaluation of materials, and transfer of certain treasures
elsewhere for safety. The Florida Committee secured the cooperation
of the state university's Extension Division in giving
short training courses on air raid protection problems to custodians
of cultural materials. In Minnesota affiliation with the
Office of Civilian Defense facilitated publicity and gave additional
weight to the Committee's protective program. The Virginia CCCR
was especially perturbed about exposure to air attack of certain

tidewater county records in the area between Norfolk and Richmond.
A microfilm project of the Virginia State Library somewhat
reduced this hazard by borrowing many of the older records
for copying. A similar undertaking was outlined in the State of
Washington for microfilming vital public records in target areas
along the coast, beginning in Tacoma and Everett, where necessary
equipment was obtained. The Defense Council of New York
issued a Handbook of Civilian Protection (1942) with a section
on protection of records, rare books, and art treasures, by Richard
B. Morris. In Massachusetts a Committee on Protection of
Valuable Objects pioneered in this field in 1941 in advance of the
CCCR. These examples indicate widespread and rapid development,
during the early months of America at war, of a movement
which had little chance of support before Pearl Harbor.

In mid-December 1941 the writer gave some attention to the
question of what might be done in Virginia for the preservation
of materials pertaining to the present war. During 1917-18 many
states had engaged in collecting source materials and in compiling
military service records for war histories, under the
auspices of permanent historical agencies or of commissions specially
created for this purpose. Virginia, however, like a number
of other states, did not launch such a project until after the
war—in this instance not until 1920, when the Virginia War
History Commission was established. By that time many of the
contemporary records had been lost or were difficult to find, and
only a small fraction of public interest in activities relating to
the war had survived. What could be done to meet this situation
more promptly and more effectively in World War II?
The writer drafted a proposal for a war records commission composed
of certain historians, archivists, and librarians, to be set up
as an agency of the Virginia Defense Council, to collect Virginia
materials on the war and to promote the work of city and county
committees with respect to local records. The chairman of the
Defense Council approved of the idea but the term of the Council
expired with the beginning of the new gubernatorial administration
in January, 1942, and the next defense organization was
decentralized, with a new personnel.

Meanwhile informal discussion during the meeting of the
American Historical Association in Chicago between the writer

and several persons from other states revealed that they too had
the idea of a war records project in mind or were receptive to
the suggestion. In view of what the National Board for Historical
Service, an unofficial agency with private funds, had done along
this line during and immediately after World War I, it seemed
desirable that a nation-wide effort to promote the collection and
preservation of war materials should be made again. The matter
was presented to the Council of the American Association for
State and Local History at its meeting in Chicago and at a luncheon
session of the Society of American Archivists. Both of these
organizations later approved the idea and expressed their willingness
to co-operate in its promotion. The first step to put the
proposal into action was made possible by the Social Science
Research Council. In February, 1942, at the request of its Committee
on the Control of Social Data (Dr. Roy F. Nichols, chairman),
the writer began a study of the problems relating to war
records in the several states—to determine what might be done
advantageously during the war period as well as afterward,
what types of materials should be saved, and what kind of
organization, state and local, might function best in relation to
existing institutions. A broader question given consideration was
how both public and professional interest in war records could
be utilized to foster and augment longtime programs for the discriminating
collection of research materials in times of peace as
well as of war. A survey was made of state and local war records
activities of a generation ago from which certain conclusions
were drawn and applied to the present situation. Advice and suggestions
were sought from a large number of librarians, archivists,
and social scientists on the scope, emphasis, and best procedure in
implementing current projects. The report submitted by the
writer to the SSRC included a specific "Plan for the Collection
and Preservation of World War II Records," which was approved
in June and later was authorized to be printed.

During the course of this study the question of whether an
agency could be found or created to promote this proposed war
records work throughout the nation was answered and the answer
incorporated into the "Plan." The Committee on Conservation
of Cultural Resources enlarged its program to assume this
responsibility as the result of a special conference held in Washington

in April. At another meeting early in September broad
objectives looking to the post-war period were discussed, along
with detailed ways and means of encouraging the inception and
growth of specific projects. By the end of the summer a few
states had already completed plans and launched projects on their
own initiative—Pennsylvania under the auspices of the State Historical
Commission, Ohio by means of a War History Commission
appointed by the governor, and Minnesota through a State
War History Committee of the Defense Council.[10]

In the realm of federal governmental records pertaining to the
war a project was launched in the spring of 1942 to provide a type
of data greatly desired by scholars and officials but seldom put in
writing. The daily routine of operations of any agency is recorded
in considerable detail, but why decisions are made and
how they are carried out are seldom recorded. Such information
on matters of policy during times of emergency is especially
essential to administrators in appraising and controlling new situations
as they suddenly arise and to research students later in
getting behind the more prosaic day by day routine. An examination
of federal records of World War I, to ascertain how certain
problems common to both wars had been met in the first instance,
showed a lack of data on the reasons for actions taken and on
steps leading to final decisions. Accordingly, at the request of
the President of the United States and with the advice of scholars
and officials concerned with these questions, the Director of the
Bureau of the Budget appointed a Committee on Records of War
Administration and set up a research staff headed by Dr. Pendleton
Herring of Harvard University. This committee proceeded
to enlist the co-operation of the various war agencies in designating
in each case a responsible official with the necessary assistants
to assemble the important documents and write up those aspects
of its work not ordinarily put in writing but essential to an understanding
of the course of events. The research staff of the committee
is concerned mainly with the interrelation of these agencies
in the leading economic and social manifestations of the war effort.
This unique undertaking also includes the all important

war activities of the White House. Here Director Fred W. Shipman
of the Franklin D. Roosevelt Library has begun to spend a
considerable portion of his time on the presidential records, supplemented
by data direct from the President himself.

Some of the permanent agencies of the federal government
likewise took action in the historical field during the first nine
months of the war. Of special interest are the projects of the
War and the Navy Departments. In July the Historical Section
of the Army War College was designated as the advisory and
co-ordinating office for all historical activities within the department.
The commanding generals of the Army Ground Forces,
the Army Air Forces, and the Services of Supply were directed
by the Secretary of War to "appoint an historical officer [and the
necessary assistants]. . . to record the administrative activities
of their respective headquarters during the current war, and
[through their subordinate organizations] . . . to insure complete
coverage of administrative events of historical significance."
The Office of the Quartermaster General had already begun such
a project at the end of May in its Historical Branch with a staff
of professional historians. They proceeded to examine the files
of every subdivision of the Quartermaster General's Office for
pertinent material and to obtain supplementary data by personal
interviews with officers and others directly involved in important
events. The staff also made plans to cover the records of the
principal field installations at home and abroad.[11]

The Navy Department approved a history of naval operations
during the war, to be written by Professor Samuel E. Morison,
and a survey of documentary sources concerning fleet operations,
preliminary to their systematic collection, classification, and preservation.
In the Treasury Department a project for a history of
the War Savings Staff's activities was initiated by George Fort
Milton. The National Research Council's Division of Medical
Sciences formulated plans for a medical history of the war, with
Dr. John F. Fulton in charge. It will include, among others, volumes
on pathology, medicine, surgery, hospital organization, individual
operations and engagements, industrial medicine, civilian

defense, and public health, with supplementary volumes from
the War and Navy departments.[12]

From the preceding discussion of current war records of the
federal government it is clear that the field of administrative
history will be greatly advanced by these investigations. Likewise
desirable correlation of this field with that of archives with
respect to record-keeping, which has been explored recently,[13]
is more evident than ever before. Urgent war problems demand
prompt and well advised answers which depend no less upon
efficient record administration than upon intelligent officials.
Moreover it will hardly be denied that this assertion, though more
pointed during times of emergency, is equally sound under normal
conditions. The overwhelming flood of non-current records released
to the National Archives by governmental agencies in
Washington, to make room for war files produced at an unprecedented
rate, has intensified the archival problem of destruction
of useless papers along with that of preservation of those of
permanent value. So serious has this situation become that the
National Archives has inaugurated a records administration
program to advise departments and agencies on controlling this
Frankenstein at the source of its growth. The invention and steady
improvement of mechanical means of producing records during
the last half-century have swelled the tide of papers in all governmental
offices. At the root of the difficulty is lack of efficient
records management. The Civil Service Commission has a special
committee appraising the situation and the Navy Department has
set an example for others to follow by establishing an Office of
Records Co-ordination, with Emmett J. Leahy in charge. In an
able discussion of the whole problem Mr. Leahy has pointed out
the need for "eliminating useless paperwork" and for segregating
great masses of papers which are only of temporary value. When
they have served their purpose, whole files can be quickly destroyed
without waste of time by custodians in the office or by
archivists later. The solution is to be partially found also in a
unified and well controlled filing system, in improved and intelligently

directed personnel, and in the use of microphotography
with proper recognition of its limitations.[14]

Frequent mention of the National Archives in the foregoing discussion
suggests its constructive and ever broadening influence
in the whole field of records. In September, 1941, upon the
resignation of Dr. R. D. W. Connor, first archivist of the United
States, to return to the University of North Carolina as professor
of American history and jurisprudence, Dr. Solon J. Buck was
appointed archivist. "The task of Dr. Connor's successors," wrote
Dr. Buck, "is to build further upon the foundation securely laid
by him."[15] In view of his experience and notable accomplishments
as administrator, historian, and bibliographer, the selection
of Dr. Buck was hopefully anticipated and widely acclaimed.
Among plans put into operation during 1941 is the finding mediums
program which, like certain other practices in the National
Archives, may be applied with modifications in some state
archives. This program involves "the assignment of all material
in the custody of the Archivist to registered record groups
[somewhat comparable to the European fonds], the preparation
of preliminary checklists and preliminary inventories for all
material as soon as possible after its transfer, and the preparation
of final inventories for record groups or parts . . . [thereof]."
Detailed cataloguing is deferred until preparation of the final
inventory; the accession is no longer used as a unit for cataloguing.
In compiling inventories for publication, priority is given
to those records concerned with problems of war and defense
during World War I or with any other questions pertinent to the
present emergency.[16]

Whether or not the National Archives building was originally
conceived as large enough to contain all non-current records of
the federal government for many years to come, the ideas of
those who have given thought to the matter have undergone considerable
modification. The tremendous bulk of records in the

District of Columbia, however much it may be reduced by proper
destruction of useless papers by departments and agencies, will
necessitate storage space close at hand. Plans for such facilities,
now deferred for the duration, will make such a building an adjunct
to the National Archives, from which certain bodies of records
infrequently consulted may be removed. Papers in the
"warehouse" would not be in dead storage, however, but only
less accessible than those in the National Archives. (Such a
warehousing project has already been adopted as a joint undertaking
of certain libraries in the metropolitan area of Boston.)
With regard to federal records outside the District of Columbia,
the National Archives is developing plans for a select number of
regional depositories. In most cases such records are of greatest
value in the study of problems pertaining to the region or state or
locality which in turn command the interest of scholars and
officials in the particular area. Although these regional depositories
would contain large bodies of material, the plan itself is
indicative of the trend away from over-centralization, motivated
not merely by congestion and overworked personnel and machinery
in our leading libraries, but also by the belief that the
cultural life of America may be better nurtured by research
collections, regional, state, and even local.[17]

Somewhat related to this movement is the new policy of the
Library of Congress whereby its acquisition of research materials
in the field of American history will be restricted to collections
of national significance. Although it may often be difficult to
draw a sharp line to exclude manuscript records or imprints of
somewhat less than national import, one may assume that this
policy will serve to enrich certain state and regional institutions
to which such collections are directed after being rejected in
Washington. Since 1900 the Library of Congress has become
increasingly our national library in ways that reflect credit on
our American democracy. In more recent years especially, this
institution with its modern techniques and well deserved prestige

has worked with other leading libraries in furthering their common
purpose and in helping all libraries to help themselves. The
success of the national union catalogue, for example, has led to the
establishment of regional and metropolitan finding mediums of
this kind. Now an author catalogue of all printed cards representing
books in the Library of Congress is to be lithographed from
those cards in a series of volumes, so that more libraries and persons
may enjoy the benefits provided at present only by the depository
catalogues maintained in relatively few libraries.[18] The Experimental
Division of Library Co-operation of the Library of
Congress, set up on a temporary basis in 1941, expired in April,
1942.[19] During the year Herbert A. Kellar, in charge of this Division,
travelled throughout the United States to discuss with
librarians, archivists, and scholars what might be done to solve
their common problems with regard to ever increasing acquisitions,
adequate controls for maximum availability and use of
materials, more liberal policies of exchange and reproduction, and
the improvement of reference tools within practical limits. It is
hoped that the findings and conclusions of Mr. Kellar's study may
be published as an aid toward the solution of these problems.
Another nation-wide project may be mentioned at this point.
When the American Imprints Inventory was discontinued in the
spring of 1942, its invaluable file of author cards arranged chronologically
by place of imprint was given to the Library of Congress.
For the duration, however, the inventory is deposited in the
Library of the Wisconsin State Historical Society. The collection
of state, national, and foreign materials on the present world conflict
by the Library of Congress has been under way since the outbreak
of the war in September, 1939. These are only a few examples
of how our national library serves increasingly the whole
country in the realm of scholarship.

War-time efforts of research libraries and archival institutions
have curtailed but by no means replaced all their normal peacetime
activities. Nor is it desirable that most phases of our cultural

life should be discontinued during a war in which it is generally
agreed that "ideas are weapons" for fighting and for laying
the foundations of a new peace. When total war becomes a reality,
no institution can justify complete detachment from these
critical times. During 1917-18 the publications of some of our
historical societies gave not the slightest evidence of being in a
world at war. In the light of cultural developments during the
twenty years between wars, it may be pertinent to take stock on
this score again at the close of the present conflict and to draw
some comparisons.

The development of state archival departments or agencies has
become an important subject among the perennial functions of the
Society of American Archivists, inherited from the old Public
Archives Commission. A model state archives act, drafted by a
committee of the Society in 1940,[20] has been of great service in
preparing plans and promoting legislation to this end in various
states. In Florida an Archives Department has been established
in connection with the State Library; the archivist is Dr. Dorothy
Dodd. In New Jersey the State Library and the Public Record
Office have been consolidated, with Mr. James E. Downes as state
librarian. In Pennsylvania, through a joint committee of the state
Library Association, Federation of Historical Societies, and Historical
Association, a study of archival and public record problems
is in process. There has long been a need for an adequate building
for the Pennsylvania Historical Commission which has custody
of some of the state's records. To aid in promoting the
movement for a state archives department, Leon DeValinger, Jr.,
State Archivist of Delaware, was invited to address the Pennsylvania
Federation of Historical Societies on methods and practices
in his state. Pennsylvania's neighbors, Maryland and Delaware,
have made great strides in recent years in administration of state
archives and their relations with local record offices.[21] In the field
of county archives the Illinois State Library has continued its
constructive program of advising on the best methods of protection

and preservation. It has urged transfer of county records
to the state archives only when local facilities are inadequate
and hazardous. It has encouraged the growth and improvement
of local archival establishments because the intrinsic value of the
records is enhanced by their significance to the life of the community
which they represent. This argument is another illustration
of the issues involved in the question of centralization
vs. decentralization.

In the field of historical manuscripts several new programs
have been launched. At Princeton University, with the aid of a
committee of authors, publishers, and scholars headed by Carl
Van Doren, Librarian Julian P. Boyd is building up a collection
of manuscripts and imprints known as the Princeton Archives of
American Civilization. At present Dr. Boyd and the Committee
are concentrating on literary materials, including original drafts
and printer's "copy" of works of contemporary writers. In September,
1942, Cornell University began a Collection of Regional
History to preserve historical materials of all kinds pertaining to
New York State and related areas. Whitney R. Cross is curator
of the collection. The interest of certain members of the faculty
in agricultural history, folklore, and the history of education is
aiding in the advancement of this project. The Denver & Rio
Grande Western Railroad Company has established an Archives
Department with Herbert O. Brayer in charge, to administer its
official records dating from 1869 and to increase their research
value. This is an encouraging move in the field of business
archives and history which other corporations may well emulate.

As a war measure an inventory was taken of the archives of
Harvard University and the most valuable old records were
placed in the vault of the new Houghton Rare Book Library. Hamilton
College has begun a contemporary recording of its year by
year development, not only in manuscript and printed form
but also by means of the phonograph and the news reel. These
two undertakings exemplify an opportunity which most educational
institutions have overlooked. Even universities with large
research collections have often neglected their own official records,
scattered in various buildings and departments without uniform
control to assure their preservation. The records of student organizations
and activities are less likely to survive, except in the

files of the college newspaper. A well co-ordinated effort at contemporary
recording and preservation of older records with adequate
archival administration may appropriately be regarded as
a responsibility of the college and university library.[22]

The contributions of a few other historical libraries should
be mentioned here because their significance is more far reaching
than the area of their immediate operation. The Hayes Memorial
Library is compiling a comprehensive card bibliography of
American history for the period of its special interest, 1865-1900,
in three separate parts: a subject catalogue of printed materials,
a catalogue of manuscript collections and archives, and a guide to
the resources of all libraries and other depositories of importance
for research in this field. The Hayes Library prints in its Annual
Report "Abstracts of Unpublished Dissertations Accepted . . .
[during the Year] Relating to American History . . . " of this
same period. Well known are its grants-in-aid to scholars. In
the enrichment of its collections under the able directorship of
Dr. Curtis W. Garrison it has laid considerable stress on southern
materials.[23] Like this library with its nucleus of President Hayes
and the Hayes family papers, the Franklin D. Roosevelt Library
finds its special concern with the twentieth century emanating
from the Roosevelt papers and the President's collections on
shipping and maritime history. Most of the acquisitions of this
library are of great national and international significance, but
the choicest fruits will be relished first by the next generation of
historians. Such is also the case with many of the treasures
flowing into the Hoover War Library. One may well question
whether we shall have soon again two successive presidents of
the United States contributing so much to historical scholarship.

The initial success of the American Association for State and

Local History in bringing to a focus the problems of this field and
in providing for exchange of information and opinion was set
forth in the preceding report of the writer.[24] The Association's
subsequent progress has justified the most hopeful expectations,
as evidenced in its first annual meeting at Hartford, Connecticut,
opening in joint session with the Society of American Archivists.
Three publications during the past year in a series of Bulletins
reveal an emphasis upon practical problems which the authors
discuss from their own experience. In the first Dr. Edward P.
Alexander describes a variety of activities through which a society
may advance the historical appreciation of the community.[25]
Sylvester K. Stevens in the second issue writes on "Local History
and Winning the War;" and Loring McMillen discusses "Using
Volunteers in the Local Historical Society's Program."[26] The
Association is co-sponsor with the National Genealogical Society
of a series of inexpensive facsimiles of source materials, selected
for their national significance.[27]

In Virginia, as earlier reports in this series have indicated,
increasing interest in the collection, preservation, and publication
of historical sources has been most clearly manifested in activities
of the three oldest cultural institutions supported by the state—
the College of William and Mary, the Virginia State Library, and
the University of Virginia. What they and other institutions in
the state have done, however much restricted to the present
bounds of the Old Dominion, has been basic to the flowering of
southern historiography which is sometimes associated with the
so-called southern renaissance in literature and the humanities
since the first World War. During the past year the College of
William and Mary Library under Dr. E. G. Swem has been concentrating
on materials pertaining to its own history in anticipation
of its two hundred and fiftieth anniversary in 1943. Hollins
College was engaged in a similar undertaking in writing its centennial
history as part of its celebration of 1942. Washington and
Lee began a program to augment its R. E. Lee Collection and to

compile a check list of all known Lee manuscript items. Professor
Allen W. Moger was appointed archivist.

Some encouraging evidence of local historical work noted a
year ago[28] deserves further comment. The Clarke County Historical
Association has accumulated a collection of some three
hundred negatives of portraits in Virginia. Beginning with their
own county and the neighboring area, the Association's special
committee ranged farther afield to include certain important
public collections in the state. With written permission from
the owner, the Association will supply at cost any order for
photographs from these negatives.[29] In April, 1942, the Albemarle
County Historical Society published the second volume of its
Papers, edited by the writer of this report. It has in preparation
a reprint of recollections of James Alexander, founder of the
Charlottesville Jeffersonian Republican, who in the 1870's wrote
a series of articles for this paper describing in detail the town
and its inhabitants as he found them when he became a resident
in 1828. The quarterly meetings of the Albemarle society
included a summer program at Monticello on Jefferson's home and
gardens. In connection with materials on local history in Virginia
should be mentioned the last publications of the Historical
Records Survey. These consisted of an inventory of the records
of Prince George County, an . . . Index to Marriage Notices in
the [Baptist] Religious Herald, Richmond, Virginia, 1828-1938
(2 vols.), and an Index to Marriage Notices in the [Episcopal]
Southern Churchman, 1835-1941 (2 vols.). When the HRS project
was discontinued, its unpublished materials were deposited in
the Archives Division of the Virginia State Library.

The University of Virginia Library has in progress a guide to
its manuscript collections to be published at some future date
impossible to set at present. It will include all materials acquired
before the year 1940-41, when the first annual list of accessions
was published.[30] Work has been begun on a calendar of the
Lee Papers during the period of the American Revolution. A
small beginning has been made in compiling a list of literary

manuscripts in the McGregor Library's collection. Another McGregor
project for which plans are under way is a bibliography
of books in this collection relating to description and travel in
America, because the library is especially rich in Americana of
this character. A main entry catalogue of all Virginia maps in
the Alderman and McGregor libraries is also in progress.

The universality of Thomas Jefferson and his writings is impressed
upon us anew during times of stress in democratic government.
During the present crisis the urge to pay tribute to
the Sage of Monticello is intensified by the desire to commemorate
the bicentennial of his birth in 1943. The Thomas Jefferson
Memorial Commission appointed by Congress has been considering
what cultural activity might appropriately honor him and
make a permanent contribution to the advancement of scholarship.
Numerous institutions are engaged in special bibliographical
and historical studies on Jeffersoniana. The Library of
Congress, for example, has arrangements with the Massachusetts
Historical Society for microfilming all Jefferson papers in the
latter's custody. It is peculiarly fitting that the University of
Virginia Library should be the center for information on the
location of all known Jefferson material. The checklist here,
which includes letters received as well as written by him, has
been steadily augmented during the past year. Substantial additions
were made possible by the co-operation of the Henry E.
Huntington Library, the American Antiquarian Society, the
American Philosophical Society, and the Missouri Historical
Society at St. Louis. Since the inception of this project several
years ago by John C. Wyllie, director of rare books and manuscripts
(now on leave in war service), the project has been carried
forward chiefly by Mrs. Helen Bullock. A by-product of her
research is an essay on the history of "The Papers of Thomas
Jefferson," to explain their fortuitous division into various collections
and their present location.[31] In the opinion of the present
writer, the publication of this checklist would be a most valuable
project for the Jefferson Memorial Commission to sponsor, and a
greater contribution to scholarship than another printed collection
of Jefferson's Works. The University of Virginia Library

also has plans, near completion, for a similar card checklist
of the writings of Madison and Monroe.

In accordance with the acquisition policy outlined in the report
of last year, both the Alderman Library and the McGregor
Library closely associated with it have been enriched, as evidenced
partially in the list accompanying this report. Most of
the printed items, however, are not included in this list. A variety
of material on the present war gravitates to other divisions of
the Alderman Library. The writer has been encouraged to devote
a considerable portion of his time to the study of World War I
records as preserved in the several states and to plans for the
promotion of similar activities on a national scale during World
War II, as described earlier in this report.[32] In October, 1941,
the writer gave the Goldwin Smith lecture at Cornell University
on "The University Library's Opportunities for Collecting Research
Materials." Field work for the collection of Virginia manuscripts
and imprints has also been drastically reduced because of
rationing and other transportation difficulties. War conditions
have brought several changes in personnel in the Division of Rare
Books and Manuscripts. With the departure of Mr. Wyllie in
November, 1941, to join the American Field Service with the
British Army in Egypt, Mr. Francis L. Berkeley, Jr., in charge of
manuscripts, became acting director. When he became an ensign
in the United States Navy in September, 1942, he was succeeded
by Miss Louise Savage. Early in 1942 Mr. George H. Reese, in
charge of rare books, was commissioned a lieutenant, junior
grade, and was very shortly sent to Iceland. His position in the
library was filled by Mr. J. Wilson McCutchan, while Mr. Harris
H. Williams was placed in charge of manuscripts. Dr. William
D. Hoyt, Jr., in charge of newspapers, was succeeded by Mrs.
Helen Bullock.

Several publications were issued by the Library during the
year. In the McGregor series, the purpose of which is to make
manuscripts or imprints of special interest in its collections
widely available, was published Thomas Jefferson and His Unknown
Brother Randolph . . . (1942), twenty-eight letters exchanged
between them during the years 1807 to 1815, with an
historical introduction by Professor Bernard Mayo. Three publications

appeared in the University of Virginia Bibliographical
Series. Number Two is an Annotated Geological Bibliography of
Virginia (1942), by Professor Joseph K. Roberts, with a chapter
on the "Rise and Development of Geological Thought in Virginia"
and biographical sketches of Virginia geologists.[33] Number Three
is Early English Books at the University of Virginia, a Short-Title
Catalogue, (1941), compiled by Dr. C. William Miller of the English
Department. New Market, Virginia, Imprints, 1806-1876: a
Check-List (1942), edited by Lester J. Cappon and Ira V. Brown, is
Number Five in this series. It was done with the co-operation of
the Historical Records Survey and the American Imprints Inventory,
which provided data on these imprints in various libraries
throughout the nation. For over a century printing in New Market
was carried on almost exclusively by the Henkel Family.
Theirs was the first German press in the South. Many of their
early imprints are rare and extremely interesting examples of
early typography in the Valley of Virginia. This check-list includes
an historical introduction by Mr. Brown, graduate student
in history at the University.

In conclusion, the writer wishes to express hearty thanks on
behalf of the University of Virginia Library, to the many friends
of the University who have contributed to the enrichment of its
research collections. The list of acquisitions printed herewith
was compiled by Mrs. Bullock. For her painstaking work, the
valuable assistance of Mr. Williams, and helpful counsel of Mr.
Berkeley, the writer is deeply indebted. A special word of appreciation
is accorded to Librarian Harry Clemons, under whose
kindly direction all the staff have the daily pleasure of working.