The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1898-09-21
Mr.. BRENT TO Mr.. ROYAL.
Secretary of the Board Replies to the
Chairman Of History Committee.

Air. Frank =. Brent the secretary Of
the state Board OF Education. has pre-
pared the following reply TO the last COM
munication by Mr.. w. l.. Royal, con-
corning the history matt -
Editor Of The Times.
Sir-The sensible people or Virginia
are sick and tired OF this interminable
history controversy and ] had made up
my mind to say nothing further about IT.
But tho last .ard Of Mr.. Royal is 50
unfair and misleading, that / feel COM
PEELED TO rcfute his Misrepresentation
His suggestion that Mr. Fiske in agree
ing to modify the language OF the Brooks
Sumner episode. laid himself liable TO
tho imputation OF making the change
in order to get his book adopted in this
State is one that does the grossest in
justice to a great and fair-minded his
torian who, By his writings has deserved
the gratitude and admiration Of all pa
triotic Virginians
So FAR as j know Mr. Fiske never had
any idea that his history would be offered
for adoption in Virginia until after it
was adopted. Amy suggestion that he
should change a statement in his book
for such a mercenary and ignOble motive
would have been spurned by him. AS
/ have said before, he is too great and
honorable man 20 make any such
change except in the interest of historic
truth Show him from authentic docu-
ments that any statement made by him
IS wrong and he viii change IL to square
with the truth.
This calumny on Mr. Fiske shows the
unconscious tendency of Mr.. Royal TO be
unjust to all persons who do not happen
TO agree with him.
But this IS not all. Nfr. Royal quotes
the Brooks-Sumner episode from the
revised edition OF the history that was
issued last January and tries 10 make
IL appear that this version Of that I'M
fortunate affair was made by Mr.. Flske
at my suggestion. Now, there can be
no excuse for this statement. 1 ex-
pllcitiy stated that | had written 20 Mr.
Fiske's publishers after the book had
been adopted and called their attention
among other things-to the unfair state
ment Of this episode. and 1 published
the reply OF Messrs. Houghton Mifliin &
Company. the publishers Of the history,
I'm which they said Mr.. Fiske had con-
scented to modify the statement. And
yet Alr. Royal would have people be-
neve that the statement ia the revised
edition is the one that has been made
I'm accordance with my request.
The fact that Mr.. Royal attributes n
revision Of Fiske's History, made last
winter, 10 q request of mine made SIX
months after said revision shows how
little importance should be attached 20
his criticisms on any subject, much less
on history. on which l have never heard
any one say he is an authority M
Royal can have his children taught any
history he may select for them. but the
people Of Virginia do not recognize the
right Of Mr.. William j. Royal 10 pre-
scribe what history their children shall
study.
Mr. NJ. W. Hazlewcod complains that
TO cOnfound Mr.. Royal, I made use OF
remark that he CHazlewooO had made
to me in the office Of the superintendent
Of Public Instruction. Now until Mr..
Lakewood can show how it was wrong
Tor me TO publish remark made by him
IN q pyblic office 70 a public official about
a public matter in the presence OF q
number Of gentlemen, 1 must consider
him no better authority on ethics than
he is on history. FRANK =. BRENT.