The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1897-04-13
A ON-SECTIONAL HISTORY
FAVORED.


In 1S74-5, we began to examine north
ern school histories of the United
States. In 1875, we began to expose
their sectionalism, unfairness to the
south, and absolute untruthfulness. We
urged just what has been much urged
twenty-one years afterwards in south
ern newspapers, thai the south shall
cease to use northern school histories,
teeming with grossest lies, and use
only books of southern authorship.
You car find something Of this in
'Our Living and Our Dead" Of the
year named.
During the last six months many
newspaper essays and editorials have
appeared in southern newspapers urg-
ing the use of various southern histo-
ries of the United States prepared and
published by men and women of the
south. Virginia alone has contributed
three works of this kind. In all there
are quite a half dozen school histories.
This is we'll. They are probably as
good as the northern books, and are
dL lCdSI IfO IdlSC VI II lOhOAy ~ OOA
people. Do not each your children
lies. That may appear old fashioned,
but it is true and right.
The latest movement we have MOTTO
ed is not to have either northern or
southern school histories, but national.
Some one or more northern newspa-
pers are favoring this. Let such books
l.. G-~t 49, {ho-o,1rh1xy ~
ined before abandoning in the south it's
own books.
We have been for fifty years and
more something of an historical stu
dent. We remember to have read Roll
Inns Ancient History in eight closely
printed volumes when a boy of Is or 16,
and also Hume's History of England,
and it's continuation by Miller and
Smollett, the whole in four royal octa-
vos. And then we read RObertson's
'Charles the Fifth"-a %ponderous vol
ume, and much in Plutarch's Lives and
50 on. From that boyish time until now
we have been reading histories. We do
not hin we have read but n or two
works that impressed US as strictly
fair and judicial-in which the authors
sought the truth without conscious
bias, were not p~artiSanS or hero Wor-
shippers, or bigots, or something else
that married and made less trustworthy
the works. Hallam and Lecky, among
English authors, appear to us best bal
anced, more severely just.
Now where is the living writer who
can produce an unbiased, fair, candid,
absolutely truthful history of the
United States? All students who have
read Bancroft or Hillard or McMaster
or Ridpath or n history Of u
try can not have failed to see dis
tempered opinion or downright bias or
conspicuous prejudice or unconscious
leanings, it may be, in certain direc-
tons. In church and state men are
a rare product of any age or country
or civilization.
We would be glad to welcome the
faithful, just, unbiased history. But
where is the man of capacity who can
hold the scales evenly? When he comes
to treat of the South Carolina affair
(nullification) or of the Missouri Conn
promise. or Of the BLEEDING Kansas
outbreaks, or of the John Brown inva-
sion, or Of the great war, or of recon
struction, or Of government since the
war, can he lift himself above party
prejudice or sectional a~ntagonisms or
race troubles, or church bigotry into
the serene and pure atmosphere Of
eternal truth and perfect candor and
unyielding sincerity and a resolute
sense of right and hold the historic
stylus without Partially, without fear,
without yielding at any time to the
distemper of the age? He will be a
marvel indeed when found.
1t is proposed to prepare a history
by a commission of experts. Very we'll,
but are they experts in truth-seeking,
truth-telling? Are they so richly en-
dowed as to be superior to the follies
and prejudices and historic short-com-
ings OF our age, country and the na-
tons? We can have but little conf
dence in such a project, in such a pro-
duct. When completed and severely
tested and found to be without