Introductory 41 



James. Marshall wrote a dozen volumes, each filled 

 with several scores of dreary panegyrics, or memoirs 

 of as many different officers. There is no attempt at 

 order, hardly anything about the ships, guns, or 

 composition of the crews ; and not even the pretence 

 of giving both sides, the object being to make every 

 Englishman appear in his best light. The work is 

 analogous to the numerous lives of Decatur, Bain- 

 bridge, Porter, etc., that appeared in the United 

 States about the same time, and is quite as un 

 trustworthy. Brenton made a far better and very 

 interesting book, written on a good and well-con 

 nected plan, and apparently with a sincere desire to 

 tell the truth. He accepts the British official ac 

 counts as needing nothing whatever to supplement 

 them, precisely as Cooper accepts the American offi 

 cials'. A more serious fault is his inability to be ac 

 curate. That this inaccuracy is not intentional is 

 proved by the fact that it tells as often against his 

 own side as against his opponents. He says, for 

 example, that the guns of Perry's and Barclay's 

 squadrons "were about equal in number and weight," 

 that the Peacock (British) was armed with 32*5 in 

 stead of 24's, and underestimates the force of the 

 second Wasp. But the blunders are quite as bad 

 when distributed as when confined to one side; in 

 addition, Brenton's disregard of all details makes 

 him of but little use. 



James, as already said, is by far the most valuable 

 authority on the war, as regards purely British af 

 fairs. He enters minutely into details, and has evi- 



