29] METHOD OF INVESTIGATION 2 g 



deemed necessary to discount its assertions to some extent. 

 The volumes by Allibone and Kirk seemed quite reliable 

 as regards statements of the nature and amount of work 

 done by an author. Librarians consider them to be standard 

 works. 



In all cases of doubt as to whether an author was suffi- 

 ciently important to be admitted to the list, additional 

 works were consulted. The most important of these were : 



A Dictionary of American Authors, Oscar Fay Adams 

 (Boston and New York, 1905). 



An American Anthology, Edmund Clarence Stedman 

 (Boston and New York, 1900). 



Chamber's Cyclopaedia of English Literature (Phila- 

 delphia, 1904). 



The Cyclopaedia of American Literature, Evert A. and 

 George L. Duyckinck (Philadelphia, 1881). 



Who's Who in America (Chicago, various dates). 



In spite of the deficiencies of these sources, it is believed 

 that collectively they furnished an adequate criterion of 

 the importance of American men of letters. 



The name of each litterateur mentioned in the foregoing 

 volumes, who seemed to have any claim to a place on the 

 roll, was put on a numbered card. On the card was also 

 written the name of the class or classes of literary activity 

 in which the author appeared to have made a significant 

 record. When a man of letters had distinguished himself 

 in several fields he was noted as belonging in all of them, 

 though later in the statistical summaries he was counted 

 only in that one in which he had achieved the greatest dis- 

 tinction. On the card was also recorded a list of important 

 books written, including a statement of reprints, new edi- 

 tions, and translations, as well as any other facts which 

 seemed to warrant the inclusion of the author in the ranks 

 of American literati. 



