The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-05-14
FIRST BUSINESS MEETING
RICHMOND UNANIMOUSLY SELECTED
FOR 1897 GATHERING.
Patriotic Report on School Histories
Received with Applause-Aux-
Hilary Meetings.
Special to the Indianapolis Journal.

complete as In this city, and 1t is dsap-
pointing that the number of delegates in
attendance is not larger. The address Of
welcome was made by editor Stoll. 1t was
brief and to the point, as was the re-
Spouse Of Commander Shively. Among the
distinguished guests wno were present at
the opening were: Glen Studebaker, James
Oliver, j. B. Birdsell. George Wyman and
p. O'Bren. 1t would be difficult
for even larger cities to present
the names Of five more useful men.
The address of Commander Shively
was listened to with the closest attention.
The references to the Soldiers Orphans
Home and the State Soldiers Home
met with appreciation, but the great
est applause was reserved for the various
passages favoring the law for an impartial
and courageous school history. The rest of
the morning session and the first hours of
the afternoon session were devoted to the
reading of the reports Of officers and COM
mittees.
By vote of the department the command
er appointed committee consisting of w.
S. Haggard, A. H. Graham, William H.
Armstrong, j. j. Todd, w. NJ. Cochran, T. J..
Charlton and A. o. Marsh to consider cer-
tain memorials protesting against the school
histories in use so far as they refer 10 the
late war; and present the matter to the State
Board of Education. In due time this COM
mittee presented the following objections TO
Montgomery's Leading Facts in American
History
'First-It contains no suggestion or init
nation that the men who fought for the
preservation of the Union were right 1t is
the earnest belief of the committee that the
children who are to be the future defenders
CT the Nations honor and the guardians OF
its integrity, should learn lessons or patriot
ism from history of the civil war, and
should be taught by 1t that those who con-
tended for national unity in the great strug-
gle were right.
"Second--That there is a general unfair
ness Of treatment of the people OF the North,
of the officers and soldiers OF the Union ar
mics and the battles fought by them.
"Third-It is misleading in its statements
of fact and is calculated to give the student
false Impressions as 70 the relative courage,
armies, and of the endurance, devotion and
sacrifices of the people of the two sections
of country engaged in the conflict.
EXAGGERATED REPORTS.
"Fourth-That the accounts of the victories
of the Confederates are exaggerated, while
those of the Union armies are dwarfed and
made Insignificant by comparison.
"Fifth-That all statements Of a commend
atory and eulogist:c character are reserved
for the Confederates, while nothing of like
character is said in favor of the Union SOL
diers or people.
"Sixth-That it is unpatriotic and partisan
in statement tone and sentiment
"Seventh-It is unreliable in its statements
of facts
Among the specifications in support Of
the foregoing contention are the following:
THE statement found on page Isl, Sec
ton 313, that the Union was broken up and
the State of South Carolina had now become
free and independent nation, Is well
calculated to leave a false impression upon
knowledge of the events Of that period from
this book. We believe that the statement
of historical facts should be SO clear that
when presented to child. as fact TO be be-
leved, there will be certainty that truth
fui impressions will be left upon the mind.
We think that If any fact was made clear
as a result of the war, II was that the
Union was not broken up and that South
Carolina never became a free and independ-
ent nation. The author of this statement
may not have intended to leave such an inn
preston, but 1t seems to us that the ch.,d
VINO reads the statement in the text with
out other light must so understand IT
1.-The statement contained in the next Sec
ton that 'they-referring. to the seven
States, attempting to withdraw from the
Union--'had left the national government a
corpse lying In state in Washington seems
to Us peculiarly improper and quite inaccu-
rate as a statement of historical fact. In
fact, the entire account of the attempted
their effort 10 form government with JEFF
ferson Davis at its head, seems to us cal
culated to convey the idea that wrong
was committed by those who engaged In
rebellion against national authority.
LAS supporting the contention that undue
prominence is given to Confederate victories
and undue praise to Confederate officers and
men, we call attention to the account of the
battle of Bull Run. found on pages 292 and
293, and the foot note at the bottom of page
293. in which an estimate Is placed upon the
tonar orr of StOuewan IaCkc0n. n
trasted with this foot note We call atten-
ton to the foot note on page 97. giving a
history of the life of General Grant. These
accounts and comments upon the character
of the two conspicuous soldiers indicate the
general tenor of this work, and, as 1t seems
to us, fully tustifies the claim that 1t Is un-
patriotic in its tendencies.
1.-The statement on page 29S as 10 the battle
of Psttsburg Landing is one of the many &c
same objection, the Inference necessarily
drawn from them being, that 1t was only ia
cases where the Union troops largely out
numbered the Confederate troops that a
Union victory was secured. The statement
to which we refer is as follows: The Unior
men now outnumbered the Confedraies by
| 7,OOO,' etc. See also on this point the state
ment that at the battle of charlottesville
Hooker had twice as many men as the
CCnfederates, but he was badly beaten Pos
sibly he might have gained the victory, but
at critical moment he was struck by d
cannon ball and I'd, Was was, s sens s many
without head
I'm the account given of the Vicksburg
| campaign, beginning on page 800, the Cnly
thing calculated TO hold place in the mem
ory of child Is the endurance OF the Con-
federates who surrendered only because
human nature could endure no more. There
is no word regarding this, one OF the most
brilliant and skllful campaigns of the entire
war.
MILITARY LEADERS IGNORED.
'"rhe history contains mention of ths
services of such conspicuous military leaders
as Hancock. Logan. Reynolds, Mcpherson
and Howard. A history that finds no plac,
for the names of such noted actors in its
greatest engagements. cannot be called
history Of the civil war.
ION page 322 the author has given MS
views of the relative sufferings borne by the
North and South, resulting from the war
He tells our children that while the sacrifice
of life was suffered alike by each section
In every respect the privat.ons and suffer
ings of the war fell almost wholly upon the
South and that In the quiet homes OF
many millions OF people the progress OF the
war was only known by newspaper reports
the hardships, the horrors of the struggle
| touched none of them directly"
The portion Of the book devoted to Gettys-
burg IL criticised because IL extols Pickett's
charge and leaves the child to infer tina,
1t took the whole federal army to beat the
Confederates back. when, in fact. It was
done by Gibbons division OF Hancock's
corps, both Of whom were seriously wounded
] and vNht1o making mention Of The gallanfry