Voltaire, the cynic, maintained that “history did not _always_ lie,” which statement, though somewhat exaggerated, contains the proverbial exception which often proves the rule. The collector who adds to his store such autographs as are held for their historical value, soon realizes that writers of history often fail in their work, through ignorance of their subject, or from prejudice against giving the truth and nothing but the truth. History repeats itself, and at all times truth has been so warped, to serve one purpose or another, that the historical student, especially, rarely fails to become the confirmed skeptic in his branch of knowledge. But the subject of historical accuracy, even in relation to American history, is too extensive a one to be treated of by a single individual or encompassed within the space which could be allotted to an article of this character. The author, therefore, proposes to confine himself to the presentation of some of the historical material which is or has been in his own collection. The people of New England have, from their earliest settlement, been as noted for the care with which they have preserved their records as the people of the other Colonies for their indifference in this regard. It should not be a matter of surprise, therefore, that in consequence of the great wealth of this material in New England, the greater portion of our writers on American history and the compilers of our school books have been, until within a comparatively recent period, of New England birth or residence. The presence herein of a great temptation and of a great danger to historical accuracy are immediately seen, and the author believes that a just criticism of the works on Colonial and Revolutionary history, especially those written prior to five-and-twenty years ago, would involve the accusation of a general lack of fairness toward the other Colonies. This unfairness consisted in giving undue prominence to the acts of the New England people, both individually and collectively, at the expense of the full credit due to others, and this has been done, not infrequently, when this recognition might have been given without in any degree lessening that justly due to their own people. But apart from this want of fairness, or at least indifference, in the treatment of the deeds of others, foreign to their own territory, the manuscript material itself was sometimes falsified, as for example, it is believed Sparks did in the matter of Washington’s letters. General Washington was a man of very strong passions and was undoubtedly prejudiced against many of the peculiarities of the New Englanders of his day. And although few men held themselves in better restraint than he, he would nevertheless, at times, express himself very freely in regard to the men and measures of New England.