Читать книгу A Critical History of the Red River Insurrection - Rev. A. G. Morice - Страница 3

Table of Contents

This volume needs no preface. Its three chapters of introductory matter more than make up for one. We will here merely call attention to one or two points of a somewhat personal nature, over which we hope the reader will kindly go before tackling the opening of our History.

In the first place, contrary to what happened to our other books, which were published as soon as written, this, in spite of the fact that its preparation had been urged on us by a party whose wishes were for us orders, remained ignominiously pigeon-holed for fully six years in manuscript form. The reason for this was the unavoidable controversial, or rather critical, complexion of its pages.

Our previous productions had gained for us a reputation of impartiality of which any historian might well be proud. Were we to lose that reputation by the publication of what people ignorant of the nonsense written on the subject would be tempted to consider an unnecessarily harsh, if not one-sided, contribution to history, in spite of the fact that we never hesitate to blame Riel whenever we find him at fault? We might add that some of those we feel bound to criticize were but yesterday among our best friends.

Four of these will be found represented in one of our illustrations. Take, for instance, the last of them, Rev. A. C. Garrioch, whom we have more than once to take to task for statements and appreciations which could not be left unchallenged. Will it be believed that the venerable old man was a real friend of ours who, but one week before his demise, reminded us in a charming letter of the mutual esteem and consideration which had for years sweetened our personal relations? It is not pleasant to have to contradict such beautiful figures.

Nevertheless truth before all, such has ever been our slogan. Sentiment must not interfere with the dictates of impartiality when it is a question of history. We could only regret that our delay in issuing the present work deprives us of the satisfaction of seeing those we criticize take cognizance of our strictures and of letting them have a chance to defend their own views, should they be imprudent enough to try it in the face of the array of first-class authorities, on which we base our assertions. We would then have easily found many more to still strengthen our own position.

Past associations and erroneous ideas concerning the aims of the Métis resulting from ignorance of their language had caused Mr. Garrioch to give expression to unjust criticism. We fear that, in many other cases, the censors of the same could not have pleaded so valid excuses.

Be this as it may, such as is the present work, we confidently offer it to the serious consideration of the fair-minded student—the opinions of others can have no weight with us.

One of its features will, we imagine, compensate for its possible shortcomings. We mean the numerous references and footnotes it contains. For these we bespeak the greatest attention. Nowadays such references and notes are a sine quâ non condition of scien tific value, especially when they come, as in our case, from the opposite camp and are means of supporting the author’s contentions. Furthermore many a note, we presume to think, will illuminate points of our text with a light which is bound to add to its lucidity.

At any rate, at this stage of historical researches, a book without notes is not much more than a skeleton without flesh, or at least a body without muscles. As a partial confirmation of this we shall end by the present remark which the reader will find on page 197 of this volume:

“We could not locate that quotation of the English author, who never gives any reference in the course of his big book. . . . This exemplifies perhaps the least of the disadvantages consequent on the omission of all references in a book which would fain be taken seriously. Such works as are shorn of all references or footnotes have scarcely any scientific value whatever. They contain apparently nothing but the opinions of one man, the author, which may be devoid of all weight, and state facts, real or pretended, for the accuracy of which there is no warrant and which, for the lack of references, cannot be controlled.”