We are the largest and most prominent society of our kind in the United States, and cover a field that until we were organized had been practically untouched. The influence of our work for the last few years has been marked, and the average chronicler of American history will think twice in recording events before he permits any bigotry or outside influence to prevent him from giving the American of Irish ancestry his share of credit for deeds performed. The magazines and newspapers bear evidence of this, for, as soon as an attack is made upon the American-Irishman or failure to give him his just due is discerned, there are those who, stimulated by the influence of our Society in different parts of the country, will immediately bring the erring party to bar and suggest the proper corrections.
An illustration of this spirit may be gained from a recent event in Providence. A book called “The Modern City” was published and circulated by Professor Kirk of Brown University, and pretended to be a history of Providence as it was and is, with sufficient general reference to surrounding subjects to make it generally a complete history of that city. Among the contributors were Professor William MacDonald, who occupies the chair of American history and whose work as an historian is highly regarded both here and abroad, Professor Dealey, Professor Poland and others.
It was noticed upon an examination of this book that failure to give credit to whom credit was due among our race was most marked, and immediately the authors of these articles and Professor Kirk himself were called to account by members of our Society, the truth properly exhibited and demonstrated, and the evil effect of the book as a work of history dissipated as far as Rhode Island and the city of Providence were concerned. The members of our Society took hold of this matter with a will, and the articles written and circulated with the purpose of correcting the work of these professors and stating fully and truthfully what they failed fairly to state, are now in the archives of the Society and open to the inspection of those who may be interested.
On several occasions I have suggested to the Society the advisability of having a more complete and less perfunctory business meeting. Until the annual meeting of 1909 it had been the custom to transact all of the business of the Society between the hours of six and seven in the evening, and have all our scientific papers read at a dinner, which, by reason of them, would be prolonged to an unseemly hour. Opportunity to consider and digest excellent papers was lacking, and no time whatever was given for the discussion of them.
At our Washington meeting we transacted all of the Society’s business, with the exception of the reading of certain papers, during the afternoon, so that we had the entire evening for the dinner and the presentation of four important papers. This year the Executive Council decided that the business meeting should commence at two o’clock in the afternoon, and from that hour until five or half past we could present a number of scientific papers, elect our officers, read the monographs on deceased members, and transact the other business of the Society.
This, in my opinion, is a step in the right direction, but not a sufficient one. There should be a session of at least two days, at which members from all over the country would be earnestly solicited to attend and for whom the railroads would give round-trip rates to our place of meeting for one and one-third single fares. The first morning should be devoted to the reading of two or three historical papers, followed by discussion. A luncheon should take place, given by some member of the Society or by some organization affiliated with it or having some connection with it. The afternoon session could be devoted to more historical papers and discussion, and in the evening a lecture should be given by some person of international reputation on subjects connected with our work. The next day could be similarly used, and in the afternoon of the second day the officers of the Society for the ensuing year might be elected; and that night the annual dinner of the Society would take place, which, instead of being carried out with a studied programme filled with scientific literary matter, would be truly “a feast of reason and a flow of soul,” where our members would have an opportunity to pass an evening of real sociability and pleasure, which would be restful after two days’ work.
Such a convention would attract the greatest attention; our doings would be reported in the public press, and our papers, carefully prepared by men of ability, would in all probability be published, in part or in full, thus doing more toward bringing the Society to the attention of the American people in general than any other medium could possibly do. While it might be impossible for all of our members to attend two days, we could have more of them present at some time during the convention than attend the dinner at present.
The movement encouraging the attendance of ladies at our dinner has received hearty congratulations on all sides. There is no reason why women should not be interested in American history equally with men. The other historical societies encourage women to become members, and a step in the right direction has been inaugurated during the past year, when not only were two leading Chicago women admitted as members of the Society, but the Executive Council voted that our members could invite ladies as guests.