The Savannah morning news., 1901-07-22
ANOTHER .HIsToRY."

1 CbCNAsACAA'
| of the South have protested against
glaring inaccuracies and gross injus-
| tees to the South in many of the school
histories of the War Between the
| States, written by Northern authors,
| their protests have been met with
| sneers and opposition on the part of
certain of the periodicals and people Of
the North. Now these periodicals and
people have before them an object les
son illustrating how exasperating
! and altogether Objectionable a biased,
prejudiced and inaccurate history may
be; and certain of the Philadelphia pa
pers have been among the first to cry
out against it,
The history in question is Volume III
of the History of the United States
Navy. by Edgar Stanton Maclay. 1t
seems that the first two volumes of
Maclay's History had been adopted as
standard text books at Annapolis, and
when the third volume was brought
out, taking up the history of the SER
vice from a short time after the Civil
War and bringing it down to the end
of the war with Spain. that volume
was Immediately adopted as text
book also. The facts of the Spanish
war being all fresh in the minds of the
public, it is not difficult to judge of
Maclays accuracy, or rather lack of
accuracy in his so-called historical mar
ratiVe. 1t appears, indeed, from an
examination of the work, that the one
purpose of the author in writing the
book was to villify and traduce Ad-
miral Schley, rather than to detail
events as they occurred. The Army
and Navy Journal summarizes few
of the historians" comments upon Ad-
miraI Schley as follows:
In his report about the coal supply
of the vessels under his command
Schley exhibited either a timidity
amounting to absolute cowardice or
prevarication of facts that were in
trinsically falsehoods. (Vol. Ill, p. 1861
Schley on May 2S, 1898, turned
in caitiff flight from the danger spot
toward which duty, honor and the
whole American people were most
earnestly urging him. Viewed in what
ever light it may be, the foregoing dis
patch cannot be characterized other
wise than as being, without exception,
the most humiliating, cowardly and la
mentable report ever penned by an
American naval officer" (Vol. Iii, p.
1851 Let the Texas take care of her
self" was the heartless reply, and the
shameful spectacle Of an American
warship, supported by force superior
to the enemy's-a warship whose COM
mander had expended such vast guam
titles of ammunition in target practice
in 10 of a faGhinOa HE hotel
at Hampton Roads in order to meet a
worthy foe, deliberately turning tail
and running away was presented. (Vol.
Iii, p. 364.) Schley was perfectly will
ing to avoid blanketing the fire of the
American warships, even at the risk of
a disastrous collision with the Texas,
so long as he could escape getting too
close to danger. Schley's con-
tribution to naval strategy, as too
plainly shown by his conduct through
out the campaign, was avoid your
enemy as long as possible, and If he
makes for you, run" (Vol. iii, p. 1861
Here was have the ranking officer
who was in the line of battle in the
Santiago fight called a liar, a sneak
and a coward, in a text book placed
into the hands of the students of the
naval academy. Naturally the stu
dents will want to know what punish
ment was meted out to such an I'M
worthy poltroon. An examination of the
official records will show them that he
received no punishment whatever, but
his gallantry was recognized along with
the Others and the students of the
present day will recall that Schley
came out of the war second in popu-
larity only to Dewey. In short, they
will be forced to the conclusion that
Maclay is not reliable as a historian,
being wholly deficient in the necessary
faculty of weighing facts coldly and
dispasisonately, without favor or ami
mostly, and writing them down in their
plain truth.
The only conclusion to be reached,
after reading the extracts quoted, is
the one that has been arrived at by the
Secretary of the Navy, that Maclay' 5
History, Vol. iii, is not fit to be taught
in Annapolis. And if that volume is SO
| filled with spleen, prejudice and per-
versions, what assurance is there that
his other volumes, particularly that
one which deals with the events OF
the War Between the States, is not alsc
unworthy for the same reasons?