Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

The People’s Party Paper VQLUME HI. TSE HISTORY OF GEOraf By Maj. Chas. 11. Smith (Bill Arp\ REVIEWED BY THOS. E. WATSOM It behooves every citizen to exam ine a book whose Author claims it to be so correct a narrative of the States’ history that it should be offi cially adopted, and taught in our schools :—as Major Smith has done in behalf of his work. Inasmuch as The People’s Party Paper is read in thousands of homes there live the children who are to earn Georgia’s history from Major Smith’s book, we have felt it io be >ur duty to our readers to Review Jie work. Its Author is a gentleman for vhom we have the highest esteem ; md in pointing out the defects of his History, we do so without any ill feeling whatsoever. The style in which the book is written is charming. The sentences ire short, t’ae words simple and as a rule, well chosen. It is the narrative that fails. In dealing with the colonial period of the State’s history the Author has followed the accepted authorities and has handled his materials fairly well. It maybe doubted, however, whether a historian should invariably allude to Catholics as “papists,” and to the. Chatholic Religion as “the papist re ligion.” The Church of Rome is an able-bodied historical fact and we might as well treat it so. The Revolutionary period is badly handled. We admit that a historian cannot deal too much with biography, or dwell too extensively on details; yet we think that an author who devotes >paee to tell of the ransom of Can lain Stuart, and of the duel of Lach- An Mclntosh, might, say a word ibout Nancy Hart. We think that a History which has (pace to quote the lettering of James Jackson's tomb at it ashing ton, D. C., might at least contain a mention of Peter Early, and Wm. H. Under wood. We think also that a narrative which commemorates the names of services of Captain Grant, Joseph Habersham, Noble Jones, Archibald Bullock, Col. Montgomery and But ton Gwinnett, should have taken some notice of Col. William Few. This Revolutionary patriot w’as so emminent in character and service that no History of Georgia can ignore him without being gravely in error. As a soldier ho performed success ful service in repelling a Briti-h attack upon Georgia from East Florida; won a decisive victory over the Creek Indians witii the Georgia Militia; and rendered perilous and successful service in guarding the State settlements from Indian raids. As a civilian he reached the high est honors. In 1780 he was a Con gressman : 1782 again appointed to Congress; in 1787 was a member of the convention which framed the Constitution of the United States. It was largely through his influence that this doubtful instrument was adopted at the Convention held in Augusta, Georgia. Afterward the Georgia Legislature appointed him to the Senate of the United States. Colonel Few is mentioned in Jones’ History of Georgia, in White’s His torical Collections, and in Stephens’ History of the United State* Even in the Cyclopedia of General Biography tho name of the distinguished Geor gian is preserved, and his services enumerated. But in tho “History of Georgia,” by Bill Arp, he is not to be found at an. In such careless style are the facts gathered that tho author of this pro posed permanent Record of our great men does not think it necessary to allude to such historical characters as General Elijah Clarke save a “ Colonel Clarke ” and “ General Clarke. ” The sturdy old hero’s Christian name is loft to the imagina tion, and yet he was such an activ< factor in British and Indian wars that in the general history of the United States we can find more definite in -&>riu<'i,tion aoO’M the indomitable Georgian than we can find in Bib Arp’s “History of Georgia,”—the canals of which State should be the Kigrh.-t® to -A.ll SBjoedeii I J rivilege« to None.” special repository of his fame and works. * * « Washington's visit to the State is i noted most briefly —no incidents igiven. LaFayette’s visit, and the formal reception given him at Savannah by\Gov. Troup, is not mentioned at ah.. Yet such events constitute history. We can scarcely be surprised that the author makes no allusion to Lo renzo Dow; but we were surprised that the Baptists of Georgia are told nothing of the labors of Daniel Mar shall; and the Methodists nothing of the labors of Dr. Lovick Fierce, and bis famous son, Bishop Geo. F. Fierce. Yet the lives and the works of such men constitute history. So incomplete and partial are the references to our earlier notabilities that we are quite prepared, at a later stage, to find no mention of Dr. J. L. M. Curry, Mrs. W. 11. Felton Dr. Andrew A. Lipscomb, Dr. H. 11. Tucker, Dr. W. A. Candler, nor Sam J ones. We are expected to content our selves with such “one-hoss” politi cians as Hoke Smith, while the real workers and thinkers who have shaped and guided the development of our people are relegated to utter oblivion. Is that the kind of “history” you want taught to your children '? Can a full-size picture of Chas. F. Crisp or of W. J. Northen, or of John B. Gordon, or Hoke Smith compensate us for the loss of the records of such men as Grady ? Such splendid lessons as blossomed from the life of Stephens'? Such inspiration to effort and dar ing as spoke thrillingly from the lives of Hill and Tombs ? Such deathless devotion to duty, scornfully regardless of riches and worldly sta. tion, as ennobled the lives of Bishop Bier co and Daniel Marshall ? To compile the permanent records of the Empire State, and to thus ignore the’imperial men who carried forward the standard in Church and State, is not merely a mistake, it is an offense against the integrity and truth of the State’s history. * * * At the end of each of his chapters the author places a list of questions to be asked the children. Let us see how satisfactory are the replies which can be given by the scholar who relies solely upon the book. We will take this one as a sample, from page 45. “What of Count Pulaski'?” If the child repeats, word for word, what the author has written of the gallant volunteer from Poland, it can only say that “Col. Laurens assisted by Count Pulaski and his men assaulted Spring Hili.” * * * “Count Pulaski with two hundred men attempted to force a passage through the enemy’s works. He gal lantly advanced but at the moment of victory a heavy fire from the bat teries confused his men. Pulaski was struck by a canister shot and borne from the field to die. ” That is all. Our children are not to learn from Major Smith’s History an incident in the life of this State which deserves to ba embalmed in most grateful recollection. It does seem to us that a chron icler who could treasure up such de t tils as the stealing of cannon to prevent royal salutes, and tho burn ing in elligy of unpopular Colonial Governors, could have told, his readers - that Count Pulaski was a native of Poland, who volunteered his service in the cause of American Liberty, and after fighting gallantly al Brandywine, Germautswn, Tren ton and Charleston, fell in defense of Savannah : —where a splendid monu ment was erected to his memory in 1858. Mr. Stephens thought Count Pu laski's career so notable that in his general History of the United States, he actually gives (in a marginal note) it biographical sketch of the brilliant Pole, and on page 250 devotee half a page to'the narrative of hisexploits, and his glorious death. He died on Georgia soil, defending a Georgia city and yet the Georgia ATLANTA, GA., FRIDAY. DECEMBER 15. 1893. historian dismisses him in cold gen eralities that tell our children noth ing of one of the most daring, bril liant, and unselfish patriots that ever lived. In the annals of heroism whose name stands higher than Sergeant : Jasper’s? Here is the way Mr. Stephens speaks of him in the History of the United States : " < “The brave Sergeant Jasper, the hero of Fort Moultrie, was alto mor- > tally wounded in the intrepid assault , upon Spring Hill redoubt. He re- ‘ ceived his death-wound while fasten- . ing to the parapet the battle-rent ’ standard which had been presented 1 to his regiment by Mrs. Elliot. Never , ~ relaxing his grasp, he bore the colors to a place of safety before dea h pal- ; , sied as heroic an arm as ever fought beneath a plume. His last words 1 were: ‘Tell Mrs. Elliott 1 lost my ■ life supporting the colors she pre- < i sented to our regiment.’ ” , How grand and touching is this! | So truly historical is the entire episode, so grandly creative of the ( ardor of patriotism in future genera- ( i tions, that the historian of the Re- , public) gives us every word—and not , a word could be spared from the im- , mortal lines. But the historian of Georgia, the I i State where this humble hero conse' . , crated the soil with his blood,tho State , ■ in whose behalf he gave his noble , life, —how does the historian of Geor. t . gia tell the story'? ] Most coldly, most briefly, mostim- , , perfectly, thus: “Seeing that a shot had cut down ( the flag he had planted, Jasper seiz ed it and again planted the flag on the same spot. At this battle he was ’ mortally wounded.” : -That is ail. ! I Nothing of his tender devotion to 1 1 tho colors a woman’s hand had worked! Nothing pf a death-stricken 1 hero bearing his flag away from the reach of the enemies of his country ; Nothing of the last proud words . ' cwhiciy said ‘-Lt t death”now come— I but I saved the flag my country- i ’ women trusted to my keeping :—tell ' Mrs. Elliott so! ” < To write history in such a slovenly : fashion is, I protest, almost a crime ■ 1 Yet Major Smith, having no space ' for details of Jasper’s daring, no < space for Jasper’s last words, does < have space for the pert answer of a i 1 Spanish governor to General Ogle thorpe. i ** * ; i A most sterring chapter in our - i early history is that of the Yazoo , .Fraud. Maj. Smith gives no account of , the great litigation which ensued, and the decision of the United States j Supreme Court upholding the Fraud. ( Nor does he relate that dramatic ' incident of Governor James Jackson, , surrounded by the Georgia Legisla- i i ture, burning the Yazoo Act with a i sun-glass in the public square at . ' Louisville, Ga. I And yet all this is Georgia his ‘ tory—important and interesting. Major Smith says the Zazoo busi- i ' ness was settled by Congress, causing ■ ■ the State to cede the lands, now 1 Alabama and Mississippi. The lands were ceded, Major, but , the Supreme Court decision was the settler. A typical historic figure in Georgia i was General Wm. Mclntosh. i He was, in every respect, a leader , . and an important man. His life, his negotiation of Indian 1 ■ Treaties with the Whites, his tragic death on the Chattahoochee river, ] make a chapter of thrilling interest. I Yet, if his name, is so much as mentioned in this “history,” I have 1 ■ been unable to find it, either in the 1 . text or in the index. ' In telling tho children how we got our lands from the Indians, we can not imagine how the author could pass over Mclntosh and his ces- ' sions—cessions which cost him his life at the hands of the infuriated In dians. * * * To the Stat/ snsan is there a more 1 interesting period in our annals than 1 that which witnessed the angry con test between Governor Troup and 1 President Adams'? It was a battle- 1 royal between two jurisdictions ; and '• it threatened a serious rupture be tween the Federal »”d the State Government. Troup was wrong, and the President said so; and the Su- preme Court said so; yet he bull dozed the whole outfit, and tarried his pm. lie clearly intimidated Adams, yho could’nt stand such threati--.1: “Tho argument is ex hausted; we will stand by our arms I” Yet the children will learn none of ..he facts from Bill Arp’s Hist ryi He merely - says of Troup, in this connection ; “Nok.vithstanding the violent op position of the President, he con cluded th? treaty with the Creek In dian , and secured all their lauds in the Stat«**u Georgia.” This riucence states the case im perfect ly - I incorrectly. Exceedingly meager are the facts in referunU.- to political contests and changes. No one reading this history can derive it an adequate concep tion of de Crawford-Ciark-Troup feud. In fact, the book contains no in formation at all about William 11. Crawford - one of the foremost of all Georgians. On page 50 it is I mentioned'luat Wm. 11. Crawford and John Milledge were elected Sen ators. Tl.M'.t is all. In a bock which gives personal and private details of such characters as Lachlan Mclntosh, Mary Mus grave, and Joo Brown, it wui/ZiZseeni that William 11. Crawford might be mentioned as Secretary of the Treas. ury of the'U’iited States,-Minister to France and 3 candidate for the Presi dency. Another breezy political episode which fails ivkppear in Major Smith's attempted history is the eoptest be tween the Georgia Legislature and Senator John McPherson Berrien. The Legislature of 1841 condemned him for Els vote supporting Mr. Everett as minister to England, the Naucna'. Bank Bill, the Bankrupt JI Y " M y <* itesoihliuA wkwo passed instruct ing him how be must vote. He protested-against the authority of tho Legislature to deal with him appealed directly to the people, and the people su-taii.ed him. At the session of the Legislature of 18-13 resolutions were adopted de claring that the .Legislature had. no right to instruct Senators. This is Georgia History, ami very important history at that, much more important than an account of “George Tassel),” his trial, condemnation and pardon. Yet Major Smith gives us a full narrative of “George Tassell,” and nothing of a political contest' which shook the whole State—involv ing, as it did, a most important prin ciple. Really, this History of Georgia is raked together in the utmost care lessness. No effort is made to sepa rate chaff from wheat; none to gar ner essential facts and to avoid trifles. Reading this work, the children will never know that “Murrell’s Gang” had its organization reaching into the State of Georgia. Nor that the Cherokee Indians were so far advanced in civilization that the Chiefs dwelt in flue houses, built like ovrs ; that they kept car riages and horses; that they owned negro-slaves; and that they sent their sons to.be educated at North ern colleges. Nor that the State of Georgia pro duced the most intellectual of all the Indians ; one who invented an Al phabet and i written language fur his people. Yet all this is history; interesting and important history, much more so than the monotonous account of every little Indian scrimmage, ■* * * The nearer we come to the present times, the more remarkable these careless handlings of fact become. Judge Garnett Andrews appears both in text and index, as “Garrett’’ Andrews. Howel! Cobb appears to be living in New York at the time he died there. Reconstruction times are written up without one sketch of Ben. Hill’s magnetic leadership ; the era passes away without one echo of his clarion voice. The Constitutional Convention of 1877 is noted, but nothing is said of Bob Toombs and the gloriously Radi- cal legislation he enacted therein. Yet of that organic Law of our ■’late it may bo said that it reads as if signed “1?. Toombs, his mark.” * * * Joe Brown is remembered exten sively, and the details concerning him are so full that we regret Major Smith’s failure to record that he was a ■ member of the Republican Conven-I tion at Chicago in 18G8, and v. as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Georgia by appointment of Gov. Rufus B. Bullock. These details are tangible and in destructible parts of Joe Brown's career, and of Georgia’s history, and should not be suppressed. That’s not the way to write his tory, Major. A narrative which barely misses the mythical “bull-calf” of Joe Brown and does not miss the legen dary “wheat field,” ought surely to catalogue the results of Joseph’s sojourn with tho Republicans. In alluding to the State Road ' Lease, Major Smith goes far enough into detail to tell us that a mi>;;:hly : rental of 825,000 was accepted. I He does not tell us why a monthly rental of $35,000 was rejected. Why oid’nt you explain that to the children, Major? It forms a most interesting episode in the life of your friend, Brown. & -■* On page 108 the author says: “Governor Colquitt was again nomi nated ami was opposed by Thomas M. Norwood.” Governor Colquitt was not nomi nated. The Convention broke up, in a row; the majority faction "recom mended” Colquitt; the minority fac tion nominated Norwood. j The Convention had tied its hands ! with the absured two-thirds rule, at - i the instance of Governor Colquitt’s j’rieuda. Gen. 1» AL F., Young h behalf of Colqnitt stated, on the floor of the Convention, that he was authorized to say that if Colquitt could not get the nomination by a j ■ two-third's vote he did not want it. As the requisite two-thirds never j could be obtained, the convention adjourned without having made a ; nomination. In writing history, we should nar rate facts. To state that W. J. Northen had no opposition for his second term, but was the choice of all parties, is a I 1 I singularly indefensible piece of llat | tery. Such a statement of the case ! may strongly incline Gov. Noythen , to use his influence in having Major j Smith’s book adopted by the State I Schools, but it is a perversion of the truth which will offend all impartial readers. In alluding to the Alliance, the au thor does that order a. grave injustice- Instead of attributing its origin ■ to disatisfaetion with national legis . lation, he says “the primary cause of its rise was dissatisfaction with State affairs,” etc.—an exceedingly narrow and incomplete statement. Maj. Smith thinks the Alliance did exactly right in electing Governor Northen in his first race, but in the second race, the order having repu diated a man who had abandoned the cause to which he owed his ele vation, Maj. Smith calls this action in opposing him “partisan politics”— and disapproves it. To demonstrate the slovenly style in which this record of the State’s history is thrown together, let us ex ..amine the last two chapters: Chapter 81 treats of Colquitt's administration, Boynton’s adminis tration, and ends by announcing 31cDaniel’s election, and the passage of the Act for the building of the new Capitol. Chapter 32 opens with the an nouncement of McDaniel’s re-elec tion, and in the same sentence an nounces Gordon’s election as Gov ernor. Exactly one line is devoted to Gordon's administration, and then we strike Northen ami get a full page and a great big sweet-looking 1 pi ture of that wonderful political ’ mouse—the product of mountains in labor. 1 At the foot of the page the author leaps lovingly to Chas. F. Crisp, and 1 the moment he can turn that shifty ' Englishman loose, he makes an ec ’ j static dash for Hoke Smith. NUMBER 13 Being afraid we can’t find the ful page pictures of Smith and Crisp, the author tells us they are there—to seek and we shall find. Think of a Historian telling his ri'.iders to look out for the pictures! Now observe! Although Maj. Smith has brought the record down to 1893; there is not one word I about the election of Gordon to the Senate in Is'. 1 ! ; not a word abouk Calhoun’s and Norwood’s and Hines’ candidacy for that office; not a word about the formal organization of the People's party; not a word about its nomination of Hon. W. L. Peek for Go. .jrnor and his campaign in 1892; not a word about the Congressional elections of 1892 ; not a word about Colquitt’s re-election to the Senate. In fact, no scholar could learn from this history who are the present Senators of Georgia. Can such a book be called a His tory ? One would suppose that a school history of Georgia would give some account of the evolution of the edu cational processes. The splendid work of Hou. Nat Harris in behalf of the Techno logical School, and the nature, pur poses and workings of the school itself, deserved honorable mention. But beyond a mere place in the catalogue of colleges in the appendix the Techneological Institute is not mentionnl at. all. lion. W. Y'. Atkinson surely de served notice in connection with the Woman's Normal and Industrial College at Milledgeville. But this institution which, like the Techno logical School, marked a distinct ad. vance in educational progress, has no place in the text of the work, and is merely catalogued in the appendix. A history which stoops to such minuteness as to record the fact that a geological survey of the State w;. .■ I in 1’ 73, might wry well have explained, recorded the facts in reference to these two great schools. | The opening sentence of the book | is in these words: ; “The history of a State is chiefly ! a biography of its notable people.” Let us grant it. Then tell lis, Major, | why Hoke Smith’s name and picture : are so prominent in your history, ' while Henry Grafiy’s name is not i there at al!'? Is a history of Georgia satisfactory which says nothing whatever of that wonderful genius and his glorious work ? Only in the appendix, and by bare mention of name, is he to be found at all. If the lives of notable people make a State’s history, why is it that Major Smith tells us nothing of the Cummings of Richmond county—a family whose members have been noted for talent, courage, patriotism and loftiness of character, from ■ Revolutionary times down to the . i present'? Y et the mime of this notable family ; is not to be found in Major Smith’s ! book at all. 1 Thos. AV. Thomas is not mentioned, i nor is Thos. IL 11. Cobb; nor are any i particulars given of Walter Colquitt, an infinitely superior man to his son, A. IL Colquitt. Among the “most notable people” this State over produced were the Lamars. But Major Smith tells us nothing of them; nothing of Mira beau Lamar, hero of Texan Inde pendence, and President of the Texan Republic; nothing of L. Q. C. Lamar, Cabinet officer, Senator and Supreme Court Judge. Judge Dooly was certainly one of our “notable people,” but you would never know’ it from this book. Miles W. Lewis, Philip Cone, Judge A. IL Wright, Andrew J. Miller, Peter Early, Hiram Warner, were “notable people,” but no ac count is given of them in this book- Major Smith thinks it worth his while to give biographical sketches of John Forsyth, Howell Cobb and ; George M. Troup. So it was ! But is it not strange that he should give no particulars whatever of Ben Hill, Alec Stephens, ■ or Bob Toombs ? In the meagerest 1 way he mentions the positions they ■ filled. Nothing is told us of the - men themselves. How can »■ book filled with such