The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-05-09
SOME MORE PARTISAN HISTORY.

the Republic.
State-Department Commander James S.
Graham, q. A. r., has made public at
Albany, New York, the report OF the U.
A. u. committee which has been exam
lining the histories used in the schools re-
lating to the civil war, with a view to re-
porting upon Objectionable matter found
in them. This committee finds that none
of the histories in use in the schools come
up to the proper standard. The report
says:
I'VE open this report with two songs
copied from the Academy Song Book,
which we find In use in the school system
of the city of Albany. While the book Is
not a history, we deem the historic mat
ter contained in the songs within our
duty and while the book in other respects
is unobjectionable we consider the songs
sufficient 10 condemn it. We DO not ma
in any school history in use IN this state
a fair statement of the cause Of the war
This question appears to your committee
to be the first that presents itself 10
student wishing to obtain correct I'M
derstanding of that great conflict.
Barnes's history is extensively used IN
our schools, but your committee Is COM
PEELED 10 say that it Is very unsatisfac-
tory. Although il was written by com
rade, and has been endorsed by com
rades in high rank, We cannot approve
it. only once In this book do we find the
word secession. nor do we find the words
traitor treason rebel patriot or
patriotism and only once the word nag.
1t refers TO the Enartyred Lincoln as a
man with no schooling, ungainly, unre-
fined, ali Of which has no place in school
history, and as a fact is absolutely false.
In Anderson's and Thomas's histories
we find no Objectionable matter ana our
criticisms of these books are that they
are incomplete The first war picture IN
Scudder's history is one of JEFF DAVIS, the
second of General Scott, and the thlrd
| of Robert T. Lee He gives no fair state
ment of the cause of the war. 1t con-
| tains no condemnation Of the rebellion.
| 1t is difficult to say whether this history
iustifes secession or not. Montgomery
school history is largely in use, and we
have examined it with considerable care.
There is very little patriotism taught IN
MONTGOMERY leading facts. so far as IL
relates TO the civil war, and its un-Ameri-
can and unpatriotic omissions are numer-
ous. Your committee, therefore, does not
anprove IL for use in the schools In TINS
State.
"Flsk's school history is more satisfac-
tory TO your committee. We DO not
think that 1t contains any obJectlonaple
statements concerning the civil war
While Fisk's history comes the nearest
TO the idea OF your committee, we are
compelled TO report that, in our OPINION
the history of the civil war should be re-
a
written for use in the schools IN TINS
State. We further suggest that the SUI
nclency and adaptability of school MS
tory should be under the control OF pro
per State authority
The part of the report that we nave
seen does not contain those songs so 'hat
we are left to conjecture what their oha-
racter is. They, perhaps, failed to men
| ton the fact that John Browns BODY
lies buried in the ground" or that zen
| Davis should be hung TO sour apple
| tree" and with noble. patriotic senu-
ments Of that sort omitted, any history
containing songs should at once stand
| condemned.
| This committee is critical, too. respect
! inc the cause of the war. None OF the
| histories, it says state that fairly what
! NAV be its view OF fairness Is LETT TO
| conjecture, hut it is reasonable TO sup
pose it would have the cause stated to
| be pure treason. rebellion, and general
| cusssedness upon the part of Southern
| ers. and pure benevolence, patriotism
! and aversion to interfering with the bust
| ness Of other people upon the part Of
| Northerners.
The committees objection TO Barnes's
| History, which we should be glad to see
| excluded from every Southern school, Ie-
minds one Of Bob Acres views respecting
challenge. write it in red ink, Sir
| Luclus.' said that valorous duellist, ito
| suggest TO him the idea Of blood
The Southern boy who got all mis- no.
| tions Of the war from Barnes History
| would grow up in the belief that his
| father was a traitor. and that the per-
formances of the Confederate soldiers
| upon the battlefield were OF the most
commonplace kind. But because Barnes
has not called the Confederate traitor
| on every page, and said in so many words
| that lie was coward, inns coiniiltec
| finds his work utterly inadequate to ac-
| complaining the object Barnes had be-
| fore his mind. When Zeno. defending
Lord Mansfield. attacked Junius with the
| most seurrlous abuse, Philo-Junius. de-
| Tending him, said. II Will not call you
| liar. knave, fool. or Jesuit; but. with ell
| the politeness imaginable. / may prove
| you So" Barnes understood the art Of
| the business as well as philo-Junius. put
| this South-hating committee Is not salts
| nei unless the victim IL killed deal"
| 1t is gratifying TO ms 10 believe that
! the element In the North represented y
| men like those who compose this COM
mittee Is growing smaller and smaller
every day. The people OF the North are
growing up to a just conception OF the
sincerity and patriotism OF the Southern
| people. and TO understanding that even
| from the Northerners' standpoint, the
case was not so clear as to justify an
enlightened Northern man In branding
the Confederate soldier as "a traitor. But
We would make suggestion TO the igno-