The western sentinel. [volume] (Winston-Salem, N.C.) 1887-1926, 1895-10-24
SCHOOL HISTORIES.

ance, there is no doubt that one of
the gravest questions with which
school authorities have to do in
connection with text books for our
schools and colleges is the selection
of histories. This book is a sort of
! court of last resort with the inquisi-
| tive student and hence it is of para
mount Importance that it's rulings
should be unbiased and in accord
| ance with the facts.
We doubt that the people of the
South have exercised as much care
in this particular as they should. 1t
is wrong to compel our children to
study a so-called history that per-
verts facts and studiously permits
omissions with reference to the past
of our section, and thus creates
false impressions upon the minds of
our own children as to the record of
their torefathers and che motives by
which they were actuated. Let US
atone for our past carelessness and
Indifference in this respect by insist
ing that histories that are histories
correct records of events-and only
these are placed in the hands of our
children.
We have directed attention to this
matter before and the subject is now
recalled to mind by the following
which we clip from a recent issue of
the Baltimore Sun:
"In the interest of historical truth
attention is being called in the
South to inaccuracies, misrepresen-
tations. omissions and sectional bias
and partisan spirit, alleged to be
much in evidences in "Barnes's Brief
History of the United States,"
which is believed to be in use in the
schools of Baltimore, Hartford, Tai
bot and other Maryland counties
and other parts of the South. Re-
Gently at Richmond, Va, the R. E.
Lee Camp of Confederate Veterans
| Endorsed a resolution adopted by
the Sons of Veterans condemning the
book in question as entirely unsuited
for use on account of it's perversiOns
of fact The interest excited by this,
action caused the secretary of the r.
E. Lee Camp to ask, in respect to the
Barnes book, the opinion OF Rev. j
VIM. Jones, some time editor of the
Southern Historical Society's publ
| cations and an authority on the
history of the civil war. According
to Mr.. Jones, whose reply is pub
lished in the Richmond Times, the
Camps criticisms are abundantly
justified. 1.-The book" he says, sis
so utterly false to the true history,
both in what it states and in what 1t
omits, so utterly Unfair to the South
ia it's colonial, revolutionary and
civil history, and SO utterly false and
misleading in it's account of the
ca uses, conduct and results of the
war between the States that our
school boards should refuse to adopt
it, our teachers should decline to
teach it and parents should refuse
absolutely to allow their children to
study it"
"This is serious Indictment, COM
ing as it does from a gentleman
whose knowledge of the subject and
fairness are beyond question. 1t is
much to- be regretted that writer's OF
histories for the young cannot be
content to present the facts of
history free from the faint of local
prejudice. The truth instructs. But
perversions of the truth in our
school histories is deplorable, both
because it misguides the Judgment of
the rising generation and because it
tends to keep alive in the minds of
the young sectional animosities and
preiudices that would better be
allowed to die out. An author may
be unconscious of his lapses, being
blinded by the atmosphere of his
encourage, but his want of aequaint.
ance with or appreciation of the
whole truth disqualifies him from the
role of instructor in the NORTH as
well as in the South.
Mr.. Jones says that Barnes
history is written from sectional
point of view; distorts colonial
history to the advantage of his
section; misstates the history of
slavery; gives q biased account of
secession and it's causes, ignoring
the example of New England in 1912
and during the agitation for the
annexation of Texas; makes the
South the aggreSor in the civil war;
gets the statistics of the relative
strength of the two sections in 1861