Paradigm 2/2

To present the Irish Famine as an atrocity perpetratedby the English would be an approach rarely found intextbooks in Britain or in the Irish Republic. Incontrast, New York Governor George Pataki hasrecently sought legislative approval for this.

How far the idea is a response to the sensitivities of large numbers of Irish-Americans in the state isopen to debate. What is certain is that such concernwith the content of textbooks is not new. In thedecade which opened with the signing of the Anglo-Irish Treaty (1921) and the subsequent partition,Irish-Americans were in the forefront of anothercampaign to ensure that children’s textbooks wouldpresent an ‘acceptable’ view of the past. Their concernwas not, however, with the famine from which theirancestors had fled but with another example ofAlbion’s perfidy – the American Revolution.

The following article, initially prompted byPataki’s proposal, discusses Irish-American anxietiesin the 1920s lest the traditional ‘fife and drum’ qual-ity of the nation’s textbooks might be in danger of dilution at the hands of such authors as D.H. Mont-gomery, William Guitteau and David Saville Muzzey.

In areas of Irish-American concentration, notsurprisingly, politicians sensed the vote-grubbingpossibilities of this ‘All-American’ crusade although aclose examination of the actual works involved indi-cates that such patriotic fervour had little justificationfor Montgomery, Guitteau and Muzzey producedimpressive and well-balanced accounts in theirwidely used textbooks.

Yet then, as now, unabashed Anglophobia was to prove a politically correct stance of considerable potential in the country where St Patrick’s Day(March 17) is viewed with as much reverence asJuly 4 by the millions who claim Irish lineage.

Still twisting the British lion’s tail!

‘Twisting the lion’s tail’ has enjoyed a continuous andsurprisingly strong existence as a feature in schoolhistory books in the United States since the birth ofthe country. It has even been suggested that Americansuspicion of the League of Nations and PresidentRoosevelt’s hostility towards British rule in India were

directly attributable to the influence of ‘fife and drum’texts in formative years. Obviously this view may beboth overstated and simplistic yet it would be unwiseto minimize the importance of such ideas right up tothe present day.

The recent efforts by New York’s Governor GeorgePataki to ensure that the state’s high school studentswere legally required to study the Irish potato famineas an atrocity perpetrated by the British has causedconsiderable controversy and spawned some quiteatrocious newspaper column headings of the ‘half-baked’ variety. A bill pending in Congress would require the Department of Education to include theevent in all the model curricula it suggests with an appropriate section in school texts.1

The fact that New York has been one of the greatareas of Irish concentration in the United States obvi-ously points to strong political motivation on Patiki’spart of course. This is nothing new. In the periodimmediately following the Great War which wascharacterised by such lively debates as the ‘Red Scare’and proposed American membership of the League it appears that a somewhat less well known furore was

12 The textbook furore in the 1920s | Sidney Brown

The textbook furore in the 1920s The Irish-American angle

Sidney Brown

1 The Sunday Times, October 13, 1996, p.23. Times Educational Supplement, April 11, 1997, p.III. Daily Mail, June 3, 1997, p.7.

1. A. M. Willard’s The Spirit of ’76 was painted a century after thesigning of the Declaration of Independence in Philadelphia

Paradigm 2/2 The textbook furore in the 1920s | Sidney Brown 13

evident with regard to the education of the young.Irish-American sensitivities over the treatment they

often received in textbooks were justified. They areneatly demonstrated by comparing early 20th centurytexts in their treatment of them and the earlierScotch-Irish/Ulster immigrants. In his ‘Settlement ofLondonderry’ (New Hampshire) section D.H. Mont-gomery spoke of the introduction of linen meaningthat ‘soon every log cabin’ echoed to ‘the hum of thehousewife’s little flax-wheel’ which ‘made cheerful andprofitable music for the family’ typical of such ‘thrifty’folk.2

In contrast, barbed comments were made of later(post-famine) ‘Hibernian domination’ in cities suchas New York which were the ‘worst-governed in thecivilised world’3 where stereotyped Irish ‘poured liba-tions to their favorite saint’ and where, not surpris-ingly, ‘conviviality pervaded’ a ‘numerous and jovialcompany’.4 The infamous ‘Molly Maguires’ and the‘Bloody Sixth Ward Boys’5 (of Tammany) were givensuitably outraged coverage in the overtly WASP (WhiteAnglo-Saxon Protestant) slanted texts which had beentypical of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

One very perceptive textbook later noted that theIrish ‘took to American life like ducks to water’ and

intriguingly stated that they ‘hated England and hadlong been accustomed to use political feeling againsther in political fights and campaigns’.6

Irish-American sensitivities in the 1920s

It is suggested that Irish-Americans by the 1920s wereanxious to ‘cleanse’ texts’ treatment of the AmericanRevolution for a number of reasons. Obviously anypro-British slant was unacceptable to self-styled ‘chil-dren of the famine’ but this only partly explains theirenthusiasm.

In the ‘all-American’ crusade they would findthemselves linked to such respected bastions of theWASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant) establishmentas the Daughters of the American Revolution or thesuper patriotic American Legion and no longer feelexcluded.

In such major Irish-American cities as New York,Chicago and Pittsburgh there were, of course, easypolitical points to be gained by established and aspir-ing office-seekers.

Perhaps, most importantly, the role of PresidentWilson was significant. A former academic whoprided himself on his Scotch-Irish or Ulster back-ground he had, understandably, won few friendsamongst the Irish-American community despite theirtraditional Democratic leanings. In 1902 his text, A History of the American People had indicated that heviewed all post-famine immigrants as a ‘coarse crew’7whilst those close to him such as Walter Hines Page(Ambassador to Britain) went even further by describ-ing the Irish as ‘yellow dog’ in contrast to the Englishwho were ‘the best race’.8 Such Anglophilia, at what-ever level, understandably concerned Irish-Americansas Wilson’s term came to its end in 1920.

An American tradition – ‘Fife and Drum’ textbooks

Throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries schoolhistory texts had exhibited a powerful patriotic notein keeping with the prevalent popular view of theAmerican Revolution’s idealistic aspirations. Historywas perceived as a means by which to encourage,especially amongst the ‘new immigrants’, the ideal of

2 D.H. Montgomery, The Leading Facts of American History (Boston1890) p.97.

3 Henry C. Shelley, America of the Americans (New York, 1915) p.37.4 Samuel P. Orth, Our Foreigners (New Haven 1920) pp.108–109.5 Ibid., pp.118–122.6 James T. Adams, The Epic of America (Washington, D.C. 1940)

p.370.

7 Louis Gerson, The Hyphenate in American Politics and Diplomacy(Kansas, 1964) p.62.

8 Page to Wilson, May 12, 1916, Wilson MSS, 2, 160 quoted inSidney Brown, The Irish Question in Anglo-American Relations1914–1922 (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Bradford, 1976)p.233.

2. Commercially produced by ‘Badge a Minit’ (to whom acknowl-edgement is made) and on sale in New York. Permission given in1998 to use for illustrative purposes by the above located at 345North Lewis Avenue, Oglesvy, Illinois 61348.

9 Two especially useful works on American history texts togetherprovide a rich and often amusing wealth of materials. They are RayAllen Billington, The Historian’s Contribution to Anglo-AmericanMisunderstanding (Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1966) andFrances FitzGerald, America Revised (Little, Brown & Company,Boston, 1979).

10 Katie Daffan, History of the United States (Texas, 1924) p.179.11 Guitteau, (Silver, Burdett & Company, New York, 1923) op.

cit., p.v.12 Ibid., p.158.13 David S. Muzzey, An American History (Boston, 1925) p.180.

the ‘melting pot’ and the bases of ‘good citizenship’in the receptive minds of the nation’s youth.9

Although academic scholarship by the 1920s hadmade considerable inroads into the conventionallyheld simplistic notions of the Revolution as thetriumph of liberty over tyranny the stimulating workof, for example, the Beards had not yet filtered downto either the majority of the children’s textbook writ-ers nor, of course, to the American public as a whole.

A typical view of George III was that he was ‘stub-born, selfish, and bigoted… determined to establishhis own selfish role and… to take people’s rightsaway’.10 In this there is no hint of a rather mediocreman trying to do what he saw as his duty, the role ofvested interests or mounting defence costs to theBritish Government, the persecution of the Loyalists,Sam Adams’ propaganda machine and the deep divi-sions in British society at the time of the Revolution.

Three ‘unpatriotic authors’ – Montgomery, Guitteau and Muzzey

It would, however, be misleading to suggest that there were not text authors with impressive creden-tials in this period. Amongst them were D.H. Mont-gomery, William Backus Guitteau and David SavilleMuzzey.

Montgomery’s somewhat grimly titled The LeadingFacts of American History (Ginn & Company, Boston)held a dominant position from its date of publicationin 1890 in many of the nation’s schools until well intothe 1920s. Prefaced with Emerson’s ‘America isanother word for Opportunity’ the work has a clear‘user-friendly’ format with neat subdivisions, beautifulblack and white engraved illustrations and appearsnever to over-simplify in its effort to present abalanced view to its youthful readers.

Guitteau was the Director of Schools in Toledo,Ohio. His Our United States: A History plainly statedthat ‘History teaching worthy of the name no longertolerates the mere recital of facts, dates, and names…’ and the text holds true to this idea with itsemphasis on analysis and evaluation of the materialpresented in an effort to ‘foster loyalty to the bestAmerican traditions.’11 His chapter on the Revolu-tion, for example is supplemented with an illuminating list of references for teachers from suchauthors as Edward Channing and Albert B. Hart whoheld conflicting views on the subject.12

The resilience of texts written by David SavilleMuzzey is remarkable. Professor of History at theprestigious Columbia University, New York, his firsttext An American History (Ginn & Company, NewYork) originally appeared in 1911. Although hispublisher made several title changes, a Muzzey textwas available in every subsequent decade upto 1966!

It is not difficult to explain Muzzey’s success. Hisprose is lively, dramatic and often exciting. He doesnot shrink from making judgements, linking Ameri-can politics firmly to British traditions. Phrases suchas ‘the English race’ are liberally and warmly sprinkledin the early editions of his texts. His English ancestry,perhaps, partly explains his choice of such chaptersub-headings as ‘Napoleon Bonaparte the tyrant ofEurope’ when he is preparing his readers for an expla-nation of the hallowed War of 1812.13

In similarly clear and confident vein Muzzey’sapproach to the American Revolution implies that itwas a separation from the ‘Mother Country’ whichwas, of course, a view most commonly held at thetime (for that matter by such notables as Washingtonwho he admired) rather than the diplomatic equiva-lent of immaculate conception! Muzzey’s highlypersonalised, sharp commentary continues to impress

14 The textbook furore in the 1920s | Sidney Brown Paradigm 2/2

3. A ‘minute man’.

Paradigm 2/2 The textbook furore in the 1920s | Sidney Brown 15

as one of the brightest examples of textbook writingto this day.

However in 1921 a law was proposed in the NewYork Assembly for the suppression of sedition inschools. As well as attacking ‘radical’ teachers it gaveattention to educational materials such as texts whichwere considered ‘unpatriotic’ especially in their treat-ment of the Republic’s early years.

At the National Congress of the Sons of the Amer-ican Revolution a similar view was taken of textbooks.The group proposed that textbooks should show aclear sympathy with the principles of the AmericanRevolution. In 1923 the New York legislature passedthe following bill:

Section 680. Use of certain types of books prohibited.No textbook shall be used which…1. ignore, omits, discounts or in any manner belittles,ridicules, falsifies, distorts, doubts or denies the eventsleading up to the declaration of American Indepen-dence, or connected with the American Revolution orthe spirit and determination with which the UnitedStates has established, defended and maintained itsrights as a free nation against foreign interference,encroachment and aggression or, 2. ignores, omits, discounts or in any manner belittles,ridicules, falsifies, distorts or questions noted AmericanPatriots, or questions the worthiness of their motives,or casts aspersions on their lives.

Section 681. Enforcement of the provisions of this arti-cle. The Commissioner of Education shall supervisethe enforcement of the provisions of this article and heshall withhold all public school funds from any city ordistrict which, in his judgement, wilfully omits andrefuses to enforce the provisions of this act.14

Amongst the books cited were the works of Mont-gomery, Guitteau and Muzzey to which reference hasbeen made. Perhaps because they were in fairly wideuse throughout the United States, the three workswere rightly seen as both important and potentiallyinfluential targets for those concerned with what theyperceived questions of loyalty and patriotism.

However, ‘disloyal’ Montgomery’s prose appearedto his critics it is interesting to observe that his choiceof illustrative material remains true to the Americandream. In his chapter on ‘The first continentalcongress’ appears a striking portrait of an obviouslyalert ‘Minute Man’ ready to do battle with the Britishactually putting powder in his fire-piece! 15

As if this was not sufficient proof of his patriotismMontgomery waxed lyrical in his description of theBoston Tea Party speaking of ‘the wrath of the king’sparty’ which ‘rose to white heat’ whilst, in contrast,the mood of the Continental Congress was ‘perfectlycalm, perfectly respectful but perfectly determined’16

in its deliberations. The exact basis for his judgementis uncertain but the impression it was designed to

4. Washington before the revolution. 5. America.

14 ‘Proposed Bill’, School and Society, March 31, 1923, p.349.15 Montgomery, The Leading Facts, p.159.

16 Montgomery, The Leading Facts, pp.158–159.

make on the minds of young American readers is obvious. His work displayed a familiar portrait ofWashington opposite its title page as well as a less wellknown picture of him before the Revolution togetherwith a laudatory mini-biography containing not ahint of adverse comment.17

Rather more controversially Guitteau’s text’s first illustration does not depict Washington but opts forDaniel Chester French’s sculpture of ‘America’ reveal-ing, one assumes, an acceptable progressive qualitybut also including the Indian in the background towhom the author draws attention for he is ‘gazingwith apprehension’ at civilisation’s ‘onward march’18

by the late 19th century.Yet Guitteau’s ‘American dream’ credentials were

surely no better demonstrated by his inclusion of therecently deceased and remarkably mediocre PresidentHarding. The caption underneath his portrait makes,it seems, the very best of what was available with thephrase that Harding’s life ‘affords another illustrationof what may be accomplished in our democracy by acomparatively poor boy’.19

The extent to which Guitteau’s tongue was in hischeek at this time is impossible to know. He was atpains to point out in his preface that ‘our teaching ofhistory should emphasize… the peculiar and charac-teristic genius of American institutions’20 and thenwisely fell back on a proven hero, Washington, ‘a stal-wart man’ whose ‘noble bearing and strong handsomeface proclaimed the moral qualities greatly needed inhis hour.’21

Thankfully Guitteau added to this rather anaemicsection a touch of excitement with a somewhat start-ling depiction of ‘Colonists burning the stamp sellerin effigy’ complete with a juvenile patriot well to thefore.22

Perhaps it would have suited anxious politicians,patriotic Irish-Americans and the rest if Muzzey hadincluded such famous (albeit misleading) pictures asA. Willard’s Spirit of ’76 and Emanuel Leutze’s ‘Wash-ington crossing the Delaware’ (both painted in thelate 19th century) in his section on the AmericanRevolution. Oddly his ‘Group of revolutionary Build-ings’23 choice seems an illustration destined to causeno controversy at all save perhaps that it could appeardisturbingly tame to its ‘fife and drum’ detractors!

The role of British impressment of Americanseamen as a (or perhaps the) cause of the War of 1812remains contested but the seemingly unreliable ‘un-patriotic’ stance of Muzzey is barely evident in hischoice of an illustration of a couple of burly Britishsailors dragging away an unhappy Americanseaman.24

Notwithstanding such later British bullyingMuzzey was at pains to mention ‘The liberality ofEngland’s terms’ in his section heading on eventsimmediately after Yorktown and dared to omit alto-gether mention of such national heroes as NathanHale and Paul Revere as well as belittling such battlesas Saratoga and King’s Mountain. Whether his inclu-sion of Washington’s famous description of the Amer-ican Tories/Loyalists as ‘detestable parricides’25

soothed the patriotic critics of his work is doubtfulone suspects.

Unabashed Anglophobia and Irish-American votes

The spirit of the period is beautifully summed up bythe president of the Idaho Society of the Grand Armyof the Republic:

16 The textbook furore in the 1920s | Sidney Brown Paradigm 2/2

17 Montgomery, pp.136–137.18 Guitteau, frontispiece.19 Guitteau, p.636.

20 Guitteau, p.v.21 Guitteau, p.168.22 Guitteau, p.159.

23 Muzzey, p.131.24 Muzzey, p.181.25 Muzzey, p.130.

7. Colonists burning the stamp seller in effigy.6. Warren G. Harding.

Paradigm 2/2 The textbook furore in the 1920s | Sidney Brown 17

Discussion of controversial subjects has no place in history, it should not be found in a single school in theUnited States…. I want our school children taughtthat our forefathers were right and the British werewrong on the subject of taxation.26

The inevitable result of this approach, onecommentator, forecast would be history written underthe joint supervision of the American Legion, Elks,American Federation of Labor, Boy Scouts, YMCA

YWCA. and the Daughters of the American Revolu-tion! If this were the case, he argued, no criticalhistory would be written at all.27

Significantly one of the fiercest exhortations for‘All Americanism’ in texts came from Chicago which,of course, had a large Irish-American presence. Itsmayor, William Hale Thompson, having threatenedto punch King George V on the ‘snoot’ should hevisit then turned his attention to His Majesty’s ances-tor, George III. Showing more fervour than he wasever to demonstrate in bringing the Capone empire toheel he sallied forth in print to do battle with some of

the age’s best historians in an effort to ‘purify’ thetexts.28

From New York too, unsurprisingly, came strong expressions of concern with regard to British machi-nations. During the Great War groups of Irish- Amer-icans organised in such associations as ‘The Friends ofIrish Freedom’ had become increasingly embittered atthe conduct of ‘Scotch/Ulster-Irish’ President Wilsonand his reluctance to press satisfactorily Ireland’sclaims towards complete self-determination.29

By the 1920s the former leaders of such groupscontinued to vent their fury on what they perceivedas a growing Anglophilia. A New York judge, DanielF. Cohalan was especially active. In the PittsburghDispatch Cohalan harked back as he darkly asked:‘What would have happened to Washington had hefailed?’ suggesting that Washington might have facedthe ultimate punishment for ‘When Cromwell andthe English Parliament got hold of Charles I from theScotch (sic) they promptly beheaded him’30 leaving hisreaders to draw their own conclusions! The obviouslyrather garbled and over-simplified foray into Britishhistory was, perhaps, made more piquant by theexample of Charles I and Cromwell in that a greatdeal of the American Revolution’s rationale drewheavily from parliamentary assertiveness in theStuart period.

As if this was not enough the News Letter of theFriends of Irish Freedom warned: ‘It is about timethat America wakes up to the conditions with whichshe is confronted at this time… plans are being madeto educate our children along the lines of Britishdemocracy… the public observance of Magna Charta(sic) Day at the Episcopal Cathedral, New York (June14) is another straw that indicates the direction of thewind’.31

It would seem that a whole variety of organisationsemerged in the decade in order to alert Americans tothe dangers of British plotting whether it was at workin the League of Nations, the World Court or thenation’s textbooks. One representative group, the ‘AllAmerica National Council’ had its headquarters inWashington D.C. and its membership appeared tocomprise mainly Irish-Americans and German-Americans.32

Thus in the 1920s such groups united with theAmerican Legion and the Daughters of the AmericanRevolution assisted by the valuable support provided

26 Harold Faulkner, ‘Perverted American History,’ Harpers, 152(February 1926) p.343.

27 The Nation, September 17, 1924, p.277.28 William Hale Thompson, ‘Shall We Shatter the Nation’s Idols in

School History,’ Current History XXVI (February, 1928)pp.620–625.

29 Sidney Brown, 1976, op. cit., pp.257–287.

30 Pittsburgh Dispatch, February 21, 1920, p.3. Like New York andChicago, Pennsylvania’s main industrial city had a large Irish-American proportion of residents.

31 News Letter (Friends of Irish Freedom, New York, July 1, 1920)pp.2–3.

32 Sidney Brown, Daniel Florence Cohalan: 1865–1946: A Study ofan Irish American Leader (University of Maryland, USA, MAthesis, 1967) p.128.

8. A Swap of forms

by the Hearst press. In the pursuit of ‘One hundredper cent Americanism’ the Spirit of ’76 was, of course,regularly drawn upon: ‘Whose advice is likely to bethe wisest, the advice of Washington… Jefferson…or Lloyd George?’33

Fighting paper tigers

On balance it appears that the critics of 1920s schooltexts were over-sensitive in the case of such authorsas Montgomery, Guitteau and Muzzey. These threeauthors demonstrated powerful patriotic qualitieswhen they dealt with the American Revolution andits immediate consequences. But to their credit theyrarely descended to the strident ‘fife and drum’approach which had characterised their 19th centurypredecessors or, for that matter, their post-WorldWar II successors.

The refreshingly balanced and moderate qualityMontgomery, Guitteau and Muzzey revealed wasobviously not sufficient to satisfy the demands of the‘One hundred per cent Americanism’ crusade whichwas, of course, to concern itself with even weightiermatters in the 1920s.

Professor Dana Carleton Munro of Princeton,President of the American Historical Association,issued a note of caution as a result of the textbookfurore:

Citizens… must learn what has been done by theirpredecessors, and what the consequences were; other-wise they will be at the mercy of the demagogues whoadvocate some course of action that has been tried andrepeatedly proven a failure…. A wise father attempts to draw from his own experiences and mistakes lessonsthat will be useful for the guidance of his children. Inwriting the history of this country, we expect to do thesame for our young people, the future citizens.34

Perhaps Munro was a little off target. This was thedecade when the serious zealots had fixed their sightson such threats to the American way as John ThomasScopes together with Sacco and Vanzetti. They couldnot be concerned only with mere textbook authorsand their paper tigers!

Acknowledgements

In the research for this article the author wishes toexpress gratitude to the British Academy for financialassistance.

18 The textbook furore in the 1920s | Sidney Brown Paradigm 2/2

33 Daniel F. Cohalan, Political Isolation is Independence: World Court a Danger to Our Liberty (Friends of Irish Freedom, New York,1923) p.10.

34 Dana Carleton Munro, ‘Character Building Through TruthfulHistory,’ Current History, XXVI (February, 1928) pp.632–635.