“This is hardly a wholesome book for young people.”
=Alexander, De Alva Stanwood.= Political history of the state of New York. 2v. ea. **$2.50. Holt.
“The author’s style is clear and vigorous. His narrative is interesting and reveals his firm grasp upon the subject matter, especially as it approaches the later period. Although the work adds little to the actual knowledge of the specialist, it is a distinct advance over the old style of state histories, and will serve the general reader as a reliable and interesting guide through the almost bewildering maze of the politics of New York state.” Herman V. Ames.
+ + =Ann. Am. Acad.= 29: 228. Ja. ’07. 1090w.
“The personal side of New York politics has been over-emphasized. This defect deprives the reader of a feeling of continuity in the narrative of New York’s political history, but while it is a defect, it does not detract seriously from the value of the work.”
“When all possible points of criticism have been raised, his work merits recognition, not merely because it is practically the only occupant of its field, but because it is in several important respects a soundly informing contribution to American historical literature, useful alike to the general reader and to the special student.”
+ + − =Outlook.= 87: 131. S. 21, ’07. 1020w.
“In spite of a certain monotony which pervades the author’s numerous character sketches, his style has decided merits; in vigor and fluency it far outrivals the older but in many respects more substantial work of Jabez Hammond. The characterizations of men are clearly designed to be eminently fair, although the reader finds little difficulty in discovering the author’s sympathies. The statements of facts are usually careful, but occasional expressions are open to question.” Charles A. Beard.
+ + − =Pol. Sci. Q.= 21: 141. Mr. ’07. 850w.
=Alexander, Edward Porter.= Military memoirs of a Confederate. **$4. Scribner.
“A critical narrative for soldiers and students of campaigns, rather than a glorification of or an apology for the success or failure in the war.” (R. of Rs.) It is a criticism of the war on both the Federal and Confederate side.
“The narrative is clear and concise, praise is worthily bestowed and criticism generally well taken and temperate. To some of the extremely critical it will be disappointing, in that the maps are not as good and as full as they should be and foot-notes are wanting to show the authority upon which some novel statements are made.” E. A. Carman.