COMPLETE DIRECTIONS ATTACHED

Use the Chicago-style sheet as your guide. 

First, summarize the source, including the source’s thesis, key points, and the most significant detail or evidence supporting those points. If someone asked what this document was about, what would you say? What is the purpose of the document? What topics are covered? What are the main arguments?

Second, evaluate the source. Think about why did the author create the document and why was it written for and why?

Do not merely copy the author’s words—that’s plagiarism and it defeats the entire point of an annotated bibliography. Rewrite each source’s information entirely in your own words so that you will remember it and so that others can know if it is a source they should consult.

“An annotated bibliography is a list of citations to books, articles, and documents. Each citation is followed by a brief (usually about 150 words) descriptive and evaluative paragraph, (who, what, when, where, and why/historical context) the annotation. The purpose of the annotation is to inform the reader of the relevance, accuracy, and quality of the sources cited.”

Annotated Bibliography use documents atteached to read from below and complete assignment as explained and as the handout example shows.  Do not use any other documents or research any other documents.

SamuelGompers, “The American Federation of Labor” (1883)

The American Federation of Labor supplanted the Knights of Labor, and it developed a quite
different philosophy. Rather than trying to abolish the wage-labor system, it sought to use strikes
to gain higher wages, lower working hours, and better working conditions for its members.
Unlike the Knights of Labor, the AFL organized only skilled workers into unions defined by
particular trades. The AFL also emphasized relatively high dues in order to create a treasury
large enough to sustain the members during a prolonged strike. Under the leadership of Samuel
Gompers (1850–1924), a London-born cigar maker, the AFL became not only a powerful force
serving the interests of its members but also a conservative defender of capitalism against the
appeal of Socialism and Communism. In 1883 Gompers testified before a Congressional
committee about his organization.

. . . There is nothing in the labor movement that employers who have had unorganized workers
dread so much as organization; but organization alone will not do much unless the organization
provides itself with a good fund, so that the operatives may be in a good position, in the event of
a struggle with their employers, to hold out. . . .

Modern industry evolves these organizations out of the existing conditions where there are two
classes in society, one incessantly striving to obtain the labor of the other class for as little as
possible, and to obtain the largest amount or number of hours of labor; and the members of the
other class, being as individuals utterly helpless in a contest with their employers, naturally resort
to combinations to improve their condition, and, in fact, they are forced by the conditions which
surround them to organize for self-protection. Hence trades unions. Trade unions are not
barbarous, nor are they the outgrowth of barbarism. On the contrary they are only possible where
civilization exists. Trade unions cannot exist in China; they cannot exist in Russia; and in all
those semi-barbarous countries they can hardly exist, if they can exist at all. But they have been
formed successfully in this country, in Germany, in England, and they are gradually gaining
strength in France. . . .

Wherever trades unions have organized and are most firmly organized, there are the rights of the
people most respected. A people may be educated, but to me it appears that the greatest amount
of intelligence exists in that country or that state where the people are best able to defend their
rights, and their liberties as against those who are desirous of undermining them. Trades unions
are organizations that instill into men a higher motive-power and give them a higher goal to look
to. . . .

The trades unions are by no means an outgrowth of socialistic or communistic ideas or
principles, but the socialistic and communistic notions are evolved from the trades unions’
movements. As to the question of the principles of communism or socialism prevailing in trades
unions, there are a number of men who connect themselves as workingmen with the trades
unions who may have socialistic convictions, yet who never gave them currency. . . . On the
other hand, there are men—not so numerous now as they have been in the past—who are
endeavoring to conquer the trades-union movement and subordinate it to those doctrines, and in

a measure, in a few such organizations that condition of things exists, but by no means does it
exist in the largest, most powerful, and best organized trades unions. There the view of which I
spoke just now, the desire to improve the condition of the workingmen by and through the efforts
of the trades union, is fully lived up to. . . . I believe that the existence of the trades-union
movement, more especially where the unionists are better organized, has evoked a spirit and a
demand for reform, but has held in check the more radical elements in society.

[From U.S. Senate, Testimony of Samuel Gompers, August 1883, Report of the Committee of the
Senate upon the Relations between Labor and Capital (Washington, D.C., 1885), 1:365-70.]

PresidentWilliam McKinley’s Declaration of War (1898)

President McKinley found it impossible to resist the mounting public and political pressure for
war against Spain. In requesting a declaration of war from the Senate on April 11, 1898, he listed
several concerns but stressed the nation’s humanitarian sympathy for the Cuban independence
movement. He said little about the long-range implications of war.

To the Congress of the United States:

. . . The present revolution is but the successor of other similar insurrections which have occurred
in Cuba against the dominion of Spain, extending over a period of nearly half a century, each of
which during its progress has subjected the United States to great effort and expense in enforcing
its neutrality laws, caused enormous losses to American trade and commerce, caused irritation,
annoyance, and disturbance among our citizens, and, by the exercise of cruel, barbarous, and
uncivilized practices of warfare, shocked the sensibilities and offended the human sympathies of
our people. . . .

Our trade has suffered, the capital invested by our citizens in Cuba has been largely lost, and the
temper and forbearance of our people have been so sorely tried as to beget a perilous unrest
among our own citizens, which has inevitably found its expression from time to time in the
National Legislature, so that issues wholly external to our own body politic engross attention and
stand in the way of that close devotion to domestic advancement that becomes a selfcontained
commonwealth whose primal maxim has been the avoidance of all foreign entanglements.

All this must needs awaken, and has, indeed, aroused, the utmost concern on the part of this
Government, as well during my predecessor’s term as in my own. . . . The overtures of this
Government [to the Spanish government] . . . were met by assurances that home rule in an
advanced phase would be forthwith offered to Cuba, without waiting for the war to end, and that
more humane methods should thenceforth prevail in the conduct of hostilities.

* * *
The war in Cuba is of such a nature that, short of subjugation or extermination, a final military
victory for either side seems impracticable. The alternative lies in the physical exhaustion of the
one or the other party, or perhaps of both. . . . The prospect of such a protraction and conclusion
of the present strife is a contingency hardly to be contemplated with equanimity by the civilized
world, and least of all by the United States, affected and injured as we are, deeply and intimately,
by its very existence. . . .

The spirit of all our acts hitherto has been an earnest, unselfish desire for peace and prosperity in
Cuba, untarnished by differences between us and Spain and unstained by the blood of American
citizens. The forcible intervention of the United States as a neutral to stop the war . . . is
justifiable on rational grounds . . . [which] may be briefly summarized as follows:

First. In the cause of humanity and to put an end to the barbarities, bloodshed, starvation, and
horrible miseries now existing there, and which the parties to the conflict are either unable or

unwilling to stop or mitigate. It is no answer to say this is all in another country, belonging to
another nation, and is therefore none of our business. It is specially our duty, for it is right at our
door.

Second. We owe it to our citizens in Cuba to afford them that protection and indemnity for life
and property which no government there can or will afford, and to that end to terminate the
conditions that deprive them of legal protection.

Third. The right to intervene may be justified by the very serious injury to the commerce, trade,
and business of our people and by the wanton destruction of property and devastation of the
island.

Fourth, and which is of the utmost importance. The present condition of affairs in Cuba is a
constant menace to our peace and entails upon this Government an enormous expense. With such
a conflict waged for years in an island so near us and with which our people have such trade and
business relations; when the lives and liberty of our citizens are in constant danger and their
property destroyed and themselves ruined; where our trading vessels are liable to seizure and are
seized at our very door by war ships of a foreign nation; the expeditions of filibustering that we
are powerless to prevent altogether, and the irritating questions and entanglements thus arising—
all these and others that I need not mention, with the resulting strained relations, are a constant
menace to our peace and compel us to keep on a semi-war footing with a nation with which we
are at peace.

These elements of danger and disorder already pointed out have been strikingly illustrated by a
tragic event which has deeply and justly moved the American people. I have already transmitted
to Congress the report of the naval court of inquiry on the destruction of the battleship Maine in
the harbor of Havana during the night of the l5th of February. The destruction of that noble
vessel has filled the national heart with inexpressible horror.

* * *
The naval court of inquiry, which, it is needless to say, commands the unqualified confidence of
the Government, was unanimous in its conclusion that the destruction of the Maine was caused
by an exterior explosion—that of a submarine mine. It did not assume to place the responsibility.
That remains to be fixed. In any event, the destruction of the Maine, by whatever exterior cause,
is a patent and impressive proof of a state of things in Cuba that is intolerable. That condition is
thus shown to be such that the Spanish Government can not assure safety and security to a vessel
of the American Navy in the harbor of Havana on a mission of peace, and rightfulIy there. . . .

The long trial has proved that the object for which Spain has waged the war can not be attained.
The fire of insurrection may flame or may smolder with varying seasons, but it has not been and
it is plain that it can not be extinguished by present methods. The only hope of relief and repose
from a condition which can no longer be endured is the enforced pacification of Cuba. In the
name of humanity, in the name of civilization, in behalf of endangered American interests which
give us the right and the duty to speak and to act, the war in Cuba must stop. In view of these
facts and of these considerations I ask the Congress to authorize and empower the President to
take measures to secure a full and final termination of hostilities between the Government of
Spain and the people of Cuba, and to secure in the island the establishment of a stable

government, capable of maintaining order and observing its international obligations, insuring
peace and tranquility and the security of its citizens as well as our own, and to use the military
and naval forces of the United States as may be necessary for these purposes. . . .

[From James D. Richardson, ed., Messages and Papers of the Presidents (Washington, D.C.,
1899), 10:139-50.]

HomesteadAct of 1862

Be it enacted, That any person who is the head of a family, or who has arrived at the age of
twenty-one years, and is a citizen of the United States, or who shall have filed his declaration of
intention to become such, as required by the naturalization laws of the United States, and who
has never borne arms against the United States Government or given aid and comfort to its
enemies, shall, from and after the first of January, eighteen hundred and sixty-three, be entitled
to enter one quarter-section or a less quantity of unappropriated public lands, upon which said
person may have filed a pre-emption claim, or which may, at the time the application is made, be
subject to pre-emption at one dollar and twenty-five cents, or less, per acre; or eighty acres or
less of such unappropriated lands, at two dollars and fifty cents per acre, to be located in a body,
in conformity to the legal subdivisions of the public lands, and after the same shall have been
surveyed: Provided, That any person owning or residing on land, may, under the provisions of
this act, enter other land lying contiguous to his or her said land, which shall not, with the land so
already owned and occupied, exceed in the aggregate one hundred and sixty acres.

Sec. 2. That the person applying for the benefit of this act shall, upon application to the register
of the land office in which he or she is about to make such entry, make affidavit before the said
register or receiver that he or she is the head of a family, or is twenty-one or more years of age,
or shall have performed service in the Army or Navy of the United States, and that he has never
borne arms against the Government of the United States or given aid and comfort to its enemies,
and that such application is made for his or her exclusive use and benefit, and that said entry is
made for the purpose of actual settlement and cultivation, and not, either directly or indirectly,
for the use or benefit of any other person or persons whomsoever; and upon filing the said
affidavit with the register or receiver, and on payment of ten dollars, he or she shall thereupon be
permitted to enter the quantity of land specified: Provided, however, That no certificate shall be
given or patent issued therefor until the expiration of five years from the date of such entry; and
if, at the expiration of such time, or at any time within two years thereafter, the person making
such entry—or if he be dead, his widow; or in case of her death, his heirs or devisee; or in case
of a widow making such entry, her heirs or devisee, in case of her death—shall prove by two
credible witnesses that he, she, or they have resided upon or cultivated the same for the term of
five years immediately succeeding the time of filing the affidavit aforesaid, and shall make
affidavit that no part of said land has been alienated, and that he has borne true allegiance to the
Government of the United States; then, in such case, he, she, or they if at that time a citizen of
the United States, shall be entitled to a patent, as in other cases provided for by law:
And provided, further, That in case of the death of both father and mother, leaving an infant
child or children under twenty-one years of age, the right and fee shall inure to the benefit of said
infant child or children; and the executor, administrator, or guardian may, at any time within two
years after the death of the surviving parent, and in accordance with the laws of the State in
which such children for the time being have their domicile, sell said land for the benefit of said
infants, but for no other purpose; and the purchaser shall acquire the absolute title by the
purchase, and be entitled to a patent from the United States, on payment of the office fees and
sum of money herein specified. . . .

[From U.S. Statutes at Large, XII, 392ff.]

CHICAGO MANUAL OF STYLE: ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHIES

PLAGIARISM

When you use the words or original ideas of another person, you must cite that person’s
work in your essay. If you use the exact words from another person, you must use quotation
marks to indicate that those words are not your own in addition to citing them. While
paraphrasing or rewording another work in your essay does not require quotation marks, a
citation is still necessary. Failure to cite information is PLAGIARISM.
The Chicago Manual of Style (16th edition) uses many different citation systems, all of
which can be modified to suit the individual preferences of the professor. For this reason, be sure
to follow the instructions provided by your professor or instructor. This handout is a basic
guideline to The Chicago Manual of Style’s annotated bibliography and may not match the exact
specifications of your professor.

BASIC ELEMENTS OF A BIBLIOGRAPHY

• All bibliographic entries must be alphabetized by the authors’ last names, and
authors’ names are inverted (last name first, first name last).

• Elements of a citation are separated with periods.
• The publication facts of a source should not be enclosed in a parenthesis.

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHIES

Annotated bibliographies serve the same function as normal bibliographies but also
contain a brief summary and/or statement about a given source. Citations should be listed
alphabetically and retain the same format as bibliographies that correspond with endnotes and
footnotes. If only a few works require annotation, the annotated bibliography writer’s comments
follow the sources’ publication facts in brackets. When more in depth annotations are necessary,
the annotations should begin on a new line immediately following the entry. Annotations often
begin with a paragraph indentation.

Note: Annotated Bibliographies are not to be confused with a bibliographic essay.

EXAMPLE AND SAMPLE ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

• Format for a book with a single author.

Last name, First name. Title of a good book. City of publication: Publishing company, Year.
This is where you would write the annotation to a given work. A brief summary of
the source, the source’s relevancy to your research, or additional comments about
the information or publishing facts of the source are all appropriate for an
annotation, but not all of these elements are required. See the example below.

• For successive entries by the same author, editor, translator, or compiler, you may
use the 3-em dash to replace that author’s, editor’s, translator’s, or compiler’s name
in the bibliographic entry; however, check with your professors before you do this
because each professor might prefer the 3-em dash be handled a different way.

• Sample annotated bibliography following:

Annotated Bibliography

Bebel, August. Women under Socialism. Translated by Daniel De Leon. New York:

Schocken Books, 1971.
August Bebel’s book Die Frau und der Sozialismus is an extensive critique of the
industrial capitalist system, specifically of the roles of women during the 19th century.
Bebel’s work was a major influence on the feminist movement in Germany, as well as on
Clara Zetkin and female members of the Social Democratic Party.

Evans, Richard J. “German Social Democracy and Women’s Suffrage 1891-1918.”

Journal of Contemporary History 15, no. 3 (July 1980): 533-57.
Evans emphasizes the significance of the role of female activists in the German Social
Democratic Party. He details the rhetoric, organizational structure, and tactics that women
in the SPD used and argues that their pro-socialist movement had more of an impact on
women’s equality than did bourgeoisie reforms. He also describes the effect that the
woman had on their male counterparts within the SPD.

———. “Women and Socialism in Imperial Germany: The Sources and Their Problems.”

International Labor and Working-Class History, no. 9 (May 1976): 16-19.
Evans’ purpose in this article is to critique the historiography of former works on German
women’s studies, especially those that base their research on sources from the late 19th
century SDP. Relying solely on such official sources as magazines and the SPD’s internal
records rather than on informal documents like journals and letters may lead to false
understandings of the perception of past events, and Evan’s article will help in the
evaluation of primary source documents.

Frevert, Ute. Women in German History: From Bourgeois Emancipation to Sexual

Liberation. New York: Berg Publishers, 1989.
Women in German History provides a history of German women and their struggle for
equality. Frevert tells the story of the birth of German feminism by examining the roles
and lives of “traditional” German women in the eighteenth century, details the feminist
struggle for equality, and provides insight into the birth of the German woman in the
twentieth century.

Honeycut, Karen. “Clara Zetkin: A Socialist Approach to the Problem of Women’s

Oppression.” Feminist Studies 3, no. 3/4 (1976): 131-44.
Honeycut’s article provides insight into Clara Zetkin’s life and ideology. The article will
shed light on the motives and rationale behind the socialist aspects of the early German
women’s movement. Additionally, this source will provide valuable details on how Clara
Zetkin as both a woman and as a socialist shaped the women’s section of the SPD.

Source: The Chicago Manual of Style 16th Edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010.
Created by Todd Richardson
Summer: 2011
STUDENT LEARNING ASSISTANCE CENTER (SLAC)
Texas State University-San Marcos