Any degree of confidence which we can allow ourselves in such cases depends upon the reputation of the compiler. But no man is infallible, and how can we know that the author's methods were such as to reduce his errors to a minimum? It may be that our own family line has been treated in such a book, that we have personal knowledge of the compiler, and are well satisfied as to his carefulness and accuracy. But can we expect others to have this same faith? How are they to be convinced that our family history is correctly given in a book of mere assertions, backed up by no display of authority? Can a genealogist claim to be exempt from conditions which the greatest historians impose upon themselves? Does a Gibbons, Macaulay, Guizot, Motley, Prescott or Bancroft expect to withhold the sources of his information and ask to be taken on faith? By giving the authorities for his statements, he proves instead that he has made proper researches, that his work is faithful, and that he can be trusted to draw judicious conclusions. We appreciate the great labor involved in compiling an authoritative work and understand the temptation to compile a book of mere assertions. But we see no honest escape from the obligation to give authorities, nor is escape desirable. For it is a sad fact that some, who support themselves by means of genealogical investigation, manifest no great anxiety to do honest work. They are careless in gathering their facts, and their pretence of having surveyed a field is no assurance that desirable data have not been overlooked or wilfully neglected. In compiling, they are equally slipshod. Their work is always set forth in the unauthoritative manner here condemned, and it is most desirable that others should protect themselves from the outward appearance of a like carelessness by giving their authorities. The extra work which the giving of authorities is supposed to entail is more fanciful than real. The failure to jot down the authority with each note made in our notebook, to remind us of the actual value of each item and to direct us where to go for its context or for reinspection, is probably a much more substantial cause of extra work. And there is no difficulty in giving our authorities in the manuscript prepared for the press if this work of previous investigation has been properly done. We can appreciate the terror of the situation for one who has failed to note his authorities as he transcribed his extracts. After compiling his manuscript from his notes, must he go over the whole territory covered by his research in order to gather up the missing authorities? Unless he is of heroic mould, he will probably refuse to do so in despair!