The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-02-07
THE WARS HISTORY.
Professor Mills Denies Responsibility for Its
Suppression and President Brown
Explains.

In statement in the News, last evening, de-
nying the charge that he is responsible for the
absence of the history Of the late civil war in
the course of instruction in the city schools, Pro-
fessor Mills, the assistant superintendent, says
that lat the beginning of the school year of
1919, the first of Superintendent Browns ad-
ministration, l was assigned to the work of super
vising certain grades over thewhole city, and was
ranked as an assistant superintendent. During
that year, and subsequently through Mr.. Browns
SUPPLEMENTARY, the history of the rebellion
was omitted from the course of study. | knew
OF the omission and of the reasons therefor,
and felt that they had weight at that time But
that was responsible for the omission | en-
phatically deny and can prove" Professor
Mills further states that during the
first year of the administration of
the present superintendent the course of study
remained unchanged Prior to the opening of
the present school year Mr. Mills says he called
the superintendent attention TO the absence of
the history of the rebellion in the course of in
struction and asked if it was not suitable time
to incorporate it in the studies. In conclusion
he says that subordinate supervisor should be
able, were he so disposed to arbitrarily eliminate
from the course of study so important portion
OF the work in the history of our nation as the
account of the great rebellion, and to do so con
tinuously through period of over ten years so
effeetually that superintendent, school commits
sioners and the patriotic fathers of the children
in the classes should be absolutely ignorant of
it, is proposition too absurd for discussion. If
this be treason make the best of it. ~
Austin II. Brown, president of the School
Board, also addresses card to the News, in
which he denies having charged Professor Mills
with being responsible for the omission of the
history of the war in the course of study, and
fully eXonerates him. Mr.. Brown in his ex-
PLANTATION further says II had been member of
this committee on text books and course of in
I'll I'll
ing all of those years the question as to what
should be left out of the textbooks on history
was never brought before the committee
by those having charge of the instruction de-
partment. In this statement | am sure will be
sustained by every one who has served on the
committee. The civil war portions of the text
hood then in use were taught from 1866 to 1873,
and were, after the last-named year, eliminated
by the act of a former superintendent, without
any instructions from any committee from
the board and without the knowledge Of any
member of the board, so far as /
have been able to learn. In every discussion
before the committee there was never differ
ence of opinion as to the propriety of adopting
text books containing events OF the of the
rebellion, and these matters We're discussed with
the belief ID the minds of every member that
those events were included in the course Of in
struction. The only recollection have Of any
thing ever having been said relative to history
where the words prudential reasons were used,
was upon one occasion. A textbook was about
being substituted for the one then in use, and
the question arose as to the propriety of allow
ing teachers to explain to pupils matters relative
to very recent administrations, such as those of
Grant and Hayes, and fears We're expressed that
teachers might, possibly, owing to the events be-
ing so recent, be politically biased But this was
nothing more than an expression of opinion, and
nothing ever came of it.
As to himself personally Mr.. Brewn says that
he will be heard at the proper time and place,
not with view to defense or vindicatlon, but to
satisfy those whom he represents ON the school
board.