University of Virginia Library

Search this document 


  

collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
 3. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
Notes
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
 notes. 
collapse section 
 1. 
collapse section2. 
collapse section2.1. 
 2.1a. 
 2.1b. 
collapse section2.2. 
 2.2a. 
 2.2b. 
 notes. 

collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
 3. 

Notes

 
[1]

William Cushing, Index to the North American Review, Volumes I.-CXXV, 1815-1877 (1878), p. iv.

[2]

Neither of these errors was corrected in the list of errata, page 22 of the Supplementary Index to the North American Review. . . 1878-1880 (published without title page, but with an announcement in the back indicating that it was Cushing's work). This correction page for the previous index listed errors made in connection with twelve articles, only two of which fell within Lowell's editorship.

[3]

For the material in this and the following paragraph I am indebted to Prof. Robert E. Streeter of the University of Chicago, whose work with an earlier period of the NAR is well known. Quite graciously, he checked the new Lowell items against the Widener copy and the Norton memorandum book in the collections at Harvard.

[4]

North American Review, CXIX (July, 1864), 250.

[5]

Cushing numbers this notice as 15, without notation of the fact that in the Review it was obviously misprinted as 16. (All Harvard copies have the misprint, and I have seen no correction in any copy I have examined.)

[6]

For a discussion of this item, definitely assigning it to Lowell, see J. L. Woodress, Jr., "A Note on Lowell Bibliography," below. Ed.