The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1873-12-02

drcn of Richmond we did not conceive thai
we had right to consult our prejudices OF
partlalltlcS, and we chose SWinton because we
believed that bis book more nearly filed the
conditions proposed TO ourselves than any
other.
Your correspondent thinks otherwise, and
has preferred IN arraignment so formidable
in appearance that, without hearing syllt.
bic from the Board, or, take it, without
looking ut the book, he declares that - it
should be banishcd from the public schools
Now, | do not despair of securing modi-
flcltion of this judgment, and of showing
that neither the Board nor Superintendent
Bnford- whose decision in this matter was
simply, eoncurred in and approved, not con-
trolled oreycn suggested, by the Board--can
be charged in this matter with violating their
trust.
purpose brief examination Of Rev. Mr..
Joness criticism in every particular and
submit the decision to the calm Judgment of
the public after hearing both sides.
Rev. Mr.. Jones's objections divide them.
selves into two heads-the one general, the
other detailed. TO the former, OF course.
no response can be made.
When so competent a critic as Mr.. Jones
dcnounccs Mr.. SwintOn's history, as he does
in this article, as Il miserable tissue of error
and false statement" it is impossible to
make other answer than in phrase equally
general. / am, therefore, constrained to
oppose to it the judgment of critic of equal
information and authority, who says that
"SwiDton is undoubtedly one of the least
Objectionable writer's on the other side 8;
that he does not call us rebels or traitors,
but Contederaies, and speaks of the aca''
Of secession instead Of Hc great rebellion,
and that in his account he makes some
show of fairness"
As an answer. concede that this is OF
little value, but it derives some Importance
from the fact that it is from the pen of 80
uniriendly critic as Rev. Mr.. Jones binI-
self, and, strange TO say, occurs in the same
article with, and in the very next paragraph
to, the opposing and wholesale denunciatiOn
first quoted. But with Rev. Mr. Jones 5
consistency have nothing to do. The ques-
ton which Interests the people Of Richmond
is whether it be true that we are using a
history in our schools which is Il miserable
tissue of error aud false statement"
OF this charge Rev. Mr.. Jones processes to
furnish proofs, and as a citizen OF Rich
mond he is entitled to have them canya>sed.
But before examining the at2nls of accuSa-
ton desire 10 notice his general charge
that Mr. Swiuton throughout his Whole
book " crdltS the North at the crpenSe Of The
South. Nothing, in my opinion, could hc
more unfouudcd. lappeal from this vague
statement to the facts. His book is " Through
out" fair, il not generous, to the South.
The first word of contrast between the sec
tions found i'll his history is on page 81, ami
reads as follows:
"The people (of The colony of Nirginia)
were very social and ho>pitablc. Crime
was rare ;thctt unknown. NirSinian life and
character were very different from those oI
New England, being much more jovial aud
hearty"
And in the same chapter, page 81, he
adds:
"A love Of liberty early arose in Nirgi-
MIA. The firm stand which the Niryinan>
always made for their political rights was Il
great benefit to all the other colonies. 1t
prepared the way for independence
But possibly Rev. Mr.. Jones meant to con.
fine the observation to Nlr. Swintons story
of the late war. If 50, | submit that the
charge is equally without foundation. If il
he true, lis evidence will be found in the
fact that in the record of opposing armies i'll
battle Mr.. Swinton credits the Conlcdc-
rates with superior numbers.
Now, the precise contrary is the fact. ~
rule llr. Swinton abstains from any refer
cnce to the number of men engaged in bat
tie. and when he does alludc TO it he makes
the statement almost uniformly in note. !
have taken the pains to collect crery one Of
these, and leave the candid citizen to sly
what countelancc they afford to this aver.
fret I 1,u, f,,r nd p,T tn
campaign in Western Virginia in June, 1851
Swinton says (paSc 24S):
1.-The Union army in West Virginia num-
less than l0.00O."
ShiIoh-Aprii &, ISG2. Swintun says Umgr
2jG):
THE Contcdcratcs numbered about &C, ,00C
men: the Union army $1,000"
Aud Of the loss in that battle he says:
THE Union loss was nearly $1,000; the
Confederate luss w;s 0,0D0-killcd, wound
cd, aud missing
The next statement of numbers is of the
armies ut the battle of Murtrccsboro.
SWintcn says, y. 25S:
"Thc Union army numbered 1900, the
Confederate army 3l,0OO.'
Aud he states the Union loss ut 4,OOU
mole than ours.
The next reference to numbers is i'll re-
spcct to the battle of charlottesville.
Swintun says, +. 2CG
The North felt the disaster very much,
for lIookcr'S army was double the southern
iorce--90, 900 TO about 43.0O0.'
The next comparison by numbers refers
to the losses in the battles from Wilderness
TO Cold Harbur. OF these Swlnton says, p.
273:
"lt cost the Union army 10000 men. The
Confederate loss was less than one-third that
number"
The next reference to numbers is in The
account of the opposing armies in Virginia
in the beginning OF 1865. Mr.. Swinton says,
page 279:
Lees army was reduced to less than
forty thousand men, and the South was en-
hallstcd, whereas Grants army numbered L
hundred thousand strong"
The only other numerical comparison III
the story of the war respects the caSllaltieS'
Mr.. Swinton says, on page 2SS, that "the
killed and wounded amounted to over one
mfNion," and of these he says that seven
hundred thousand fought on the Union
side.
Now, in the face of these extracts, which
comprjse every single contrast of numbers
throughout the whole history of the war,
her TO ask what warrant there Is for Ref.
Mr., Jones's charge that Swinton cxalts the
North at the expense of tue South? The
reader will hardly believe it; but Tor fe"
cents he can verify my statement that mere
is not single comparison Of num1efS IN
.Scinion's account Of the ,cdr trhtch does MOI
eraH The South! Mol one!
Indeed, while Swinton is scrupulolls, as
think. to avoid giving the least excuse ioi
the charge of partiSanshp, there are several \,
Illustrations throughout the book Of hls illIi