"The Report of the Committee on School Books,
Adopted At the Meeting of the
Ex-Confederates of Old Hampshire
on June 3rd."

The Committee to whom was referred the matter of examining the school history used in the public schools of Hampshire County respectfully report that an examination has been made of Barnes' History, in general use in this State, and the book has been found to be both defective and unreliable. Especially in the matter of the Civil War is its inaccuracy notable and pronounced.

The book is all the more dangerous in that it professes to be non partizan and in this is liable to deceive the unwary or uninformed. To attempt to correct all errors would be a task of such magnitude as to exceed the limits of this report. We can therefore only call attention to a few of the inaccuracies or misstatements.

As to the Revolutionary War. Like so many histories, prepared in a northern latitude, and by northern pens the South is largely ignored in the common history of our country. The most trivial events occurring in the north are recorded while some of the most important events of our history occuring in the South are minimized or omitted.

(1) While the destruction of the tea at Boston is heralded far and wide no mention whatsoever is made of the burning of the "Peggy Stuart" at Annapolis, or the destruction of the tea at Wilmington, N.C.

(2) No mention is made of the Mecklenburg Declaration of Independence, promulgated at Charlotte, N.C., May 20th, 1775.

(3) No mention is made of Gen. Elijah Clarke, who commanded the South Carolina and Georgia Militia at the siege of Augusta, June 5th, 1780 and captured the notorious Colonel Thos. Brown, an uncompromising royalist, who was sent by Cornwallis to hold that section of country.

(4) The important battle of Kings Mt., which Mr. Roosevelt in his "Winning of the West" considers one of the decisive battles of the Revolutionary War is consigned to a brief foot note, while the storming of Stony Point, a gallant act, but with results which cannot be compared to those of Kings Mountain is given nearly a whole page.

(5) The Battle of Guilford C.H., N.C., which Thos. H. Benton says, "made the capture at Yorktown," and the battle of Eutaw Springs, S.C., which settled the question of supremacy in South Carolina for the Americans are summarily dismissed in a half page for both, while the Wyoming Massacre which decided nothing, is given about the same space.

(6) Of a somewhat similar character is the constant representation of the "Continental Congress" in terms and manner to lead one to believe it had absolute authority, whereas the fact is omitted that the "Congress" was little more than a Committee of Public Safety and depended for the enforcement of its acts upon the sympathetic action of the separate and independent State Colonies.

Passing now to the period of the Civil War the history spoken of Barnes, either omits or purposely conceals facts which are of vital import to a true understanding of the questions at issue.

(1) It conceals in the matter of the "Personal Liberty" bill enacted by many Northern States the fact that many of these States passed acts relative to the fugitive slave law which were actual nilifications of the Constitution and positive refusals to be bound by the compact which they had solemnly agreed to support--(p. 197.)

(2) It speaks of State sovereignty as having its rise in the days of Calhoun (p. 198) whereas the truth is the sovereignty of the States as separate and independent political entities was never surrendered. Madison himself, the "father of the Constitution" being witness and but for its recognition the present Constitution would never have been adopted.

Secession and the right to secede were never questioned until self-interest induced the Northern States to begin a war of coersion in direct violation of those rights of the States which had never been surrendered.

As late as June 28th, 1851 in speech at Capon Springs, Va., Daniel Webster said "I do not hesitate to say and repeat that if the Northern States refuse wilfully and deliberately to carry into effect that part of the Constitution which respects the restitution of fugitive slaves and Congress provide no remedy, the South would no longer be bound to observe the compact. A bargain broken on one side is broken on all sides."

Yet this phase of the question all important for discovering the truth at issue, is never alluded to save in the misrepresentation referred to.

(3) It sets forth what purport to be the fact of the attack upon Fort Sumpter as if the South had made preparation for war, had wantonly seized upon property to which she had no right and then without justification or provocation had begun to wage war upon the United States.

Whereas the truth is

(a) The South had made no preparation for war, earnestly desired peace and sent Commissioners to Washington to make equitable settlement for all property seized.

(b) The South owned her part in the Forts, Arsenals &c as much any other of the States and her money had helped to build them. Again she never ceded land for forts to be used against her, but only, as in the New York Navy Yard as long as the forts should not be used to her detriment. The United States Government was but the common agent of all the States and when the division came the land justly reverted to the South, while she was bound to make good money compensation demanded by an equitable settlement--All which she endeavored to accomplish.

(c) The South did not begin the attack on Fort Sumpter until she had been driven to do so by the coercive action of the United States Government.

With a duplicity not surpassed in diplomacy Mr. Seward, Sec'y of State, assured the Southern Commissioners above referred to that Fort Sumpter would be evacuated and all the while was preparing an armed expedition to relieve and garrison the fort. It was only when this expedition had sailed and was nearly at Charleston that the attack began.

He who strikes the first blow is not necessarily the one to begin a war, but he who compels the first blow to be struck. These vital facts substantiated by documentary evidence ignored in this book which pretends to be a history.

The naval battle between the Monitor and the Merrimac, or Virginia, is represented as a victory for the Monitor, whereas the truth is the Monitor ran into shallow water where the Virginia could not come and declined to come out and the tide ebbing, the Virginia went back to Norfolk. This is the briefest sort of outline of some of the omissions and errors of Barnes' "Brief History of the United States"--Ex uno disce omnes. From these examples we can learn the value of such a volume which purports to be history. And Montgomery's "Leading facts in American History" now in use in our schools, is in these respects little better than Barnes.

Because of these facts, which can be substantiated by examination of the books in question, your committee recommends the following action viz.

1st. It is Resolved; that we Confederate Soldiers of Hampshire county; in the interests, of truth and justice to ourselves, our children, the dead comrades who stood with us in the ranks of the Confederate army and their children, our and their fathers and mothers, and our native state; protest against the teaching in our schools of prejudiced, inaccurate and false statements, arguments, and conclusions, which under the guise of history have for the last thirty-six years, been foisted upon the children of this country, through the socalled "School Histories" which have been used in our schools. And believing that the children of our county are entitled to the privilege of being taught the truth, and nothing but the truth, as to the motives and policies of the people, and the facts and circumstances, which have made the history of our country, and that it is natural to the making of good and useful citizens, that the young men and women should be so taught, we earnestly request of the county court of this county, which is our Representative in this matter, elected chiefly by our votes and those of our comrades, and of the children of ourselves and our living and dead comrades, that the court in the future, take such action in regard to, and make such appointments of members of, "The School Book of Hampshire county," as will secure the abandonment of the books which have up to this time been taught as histories in our schools, and the substitution for these of histories which shall be unprejudiced, fair and truthful, and we pledge the court our earnest and unanimous support in any measures taken which will secure an end so much to be desired, as the one we seek.

2nd. It is Resolved, that the REVIEW be requested to publish the report of the committee to which these resolutions are attached and these resolutions and that the secretary send a copy thereof to each member of the county court.