Mr. Gilpin's reading of the duplicate copy of the Madison journal is thus the only one that has hitherto been published.[4] His work was both painstaking and thorough, but many inaccuracies and omissions have been revealed by a second reading from the original manuscript journal written in Madison's own hand, just as he himself left it; and this original manuscript has been followed with rigid accuracy in the text of the present edition. [4] Volume iii of _The Documentary History of the United States_ (Department of State, 1894) is a presentation of a literal print of the original journal, indicating by the use of larger and smaller type and by explanatory words the portions which are interlined or stricken out. The editor has compared carefully with Madison's report, as the notes will show, the incomplete and less important records of the convention, kept by others. Of these, the best known is that of Robert Yates, a delegate in the convention from New York, who took notes from the time he entered the convention, May 25, to July 5, when he went home to oppose what he foresaw would be the result of the convention's labors. These notes were published in 1821 (Albany), edited by Yates's colleague in the convention, John Lansing, under the title, _Secret Proceedings and Debates of the Convention Assembled at Philadelphia, in the Year 1787, for the Purpose of Forming the Constitution of the United States of America_. This was afterwards reprinted in several editions and in the three editions of _The Debates on the Federal Constitution_, by Jonathan Elliot (Washington, 1827-1836). Madison pronounced Yates's notes "Crude and broken." "When I looked over them some years ago," he wrote to J. C. Cabell, February 2, 1829, "I was struck with the number of instances in which he had totally mistaken what was said by me, or given it in scraps and terms which, taken without the developments or qualifications accompanying them, had an import essentially different from what was intended." Yates's notes were colored by his prejudices, which were strong against the leaders of the convention, but, making allowance for this and for their incompleteness, they are of high value and rank next to Madison's in importance. Rufus King, a delegate from Massachusetts, kept a number of notes, scattered and imperfect, which were not published till 1894, when they appeared in King's _Life and Correspondence of Rufus King_ (New York: Putnam's). William Pierce, a delegate from Georgia, made some memoranda of the proceedings of the convention, and brief and interesting sketches of all the delegates, which were first printed in _The Savannah Georgian_, April, 18-28, 1828, and reprinted in _The American Historical Review_ for January, 1898.