12
The textbook furore in the 1920s | Sidney Brown
Paradigm 2/2
The textbook furore in the 1920s
The Irish-American angle
Sidney Brown
To present the Irish Famine as an atrocity perpetrated
by the English would be an approach rarely found in
textbooks in Britain or in the Irish Republic. In
contrast, New York Governor George Pataki has
recently sought legislative approval for this.
How far the idea is a response to the sensitivities
of large numbers of Irish-Americans in the state is
open to debate. What is certain is that such concern
with the content of textbooks is not new. In the
decade which opened with the signing of the AngloIrish Treaty (1921) and the subsequent partition,
Irish-Americans were in the forefront of another
campaign to ensure that children’s textbooks would
present an ‘acceptable’ view of the past. Their concern
was not, however, with the famine from which their
ancestors had fled but with another example of
Albion’s perfidy – the American Revolution.
The following article, initially prompted by
Pataki’s proposal, discusses Irish-American anxieties
in the 1920s lest the traditional ‘fife and drum’ quality of the nation’s textbooks might be in danger of
dilution at the hands of such authors as D.H. Montgomery, William Guitteau and David Saville Muzzey.
In areas of Irish-American concentration, not
surprisingly, politicians sensed the vote-grubbing
possibilities of this ‘All-American’ crusade although a
close examination of the actual works involved indicates that such patriotic fervour had little justification
for Montgomery, Guitteau and Muzzey produced
impressive and well-balanced accounts in their
widely 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 as
July 4 by the millions who claim Irish lineage.
Still twisting the British lion’s tail!
‘Twisting the lion’s tail’ has enjoyed a continuous and
surprisingly strong existence as a feature in school
history books in the United States since the birth of
the country. It has even been suggested that American
suspicion of the League of Nations and President
Roosevelt’s hostility towards British rule in India were
1. A. M. Willard’s The Spirit of ’76 was painted a century after the
signing of the Declaration of Independence in Philadelphia
directly attributable to the influence of ‘fife and drum’
texts in formative years. Obviously this view may be
both overstated and simplistic yet it would be unwise
to minimize the importance of such ideas right up to
the present day.
The recent efforts by New York’s Governor George
Pataki to ensure that the state’s high school students
were legally required to study the Irish potato famine
as an atrocity perpetrated by the British has caused
considerable controversy and spawned some quite
atrocious newspaper column headings of the ‘halfbaked’ variety. A bill pending in Congress would
require the Department of Education to include the
event 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 great
areas of Irish concentration in the United States obviously points to strong political motivation on Patiki’s
part of course. This is nothing new. In the period
immediately following the Great War which was
characterised 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
1 The Sunday Times, October 13, 1996, p.23. Times Educational Supplement, April 11, 1997, p.III. Daily Mail, June 3, 1997, p.7.
Paradigm 2/2
The textbook furore in the 1920s | Sidney Brown
intriguingly stated that they ‘hated England and had
long been accustomed to use political feeling against
her in political fights and campaigns’.6
Irish-American sensitivities in the 1920s
2. Commercially produced by ‘Badge a Minit’ (to whom acknowledgement is made) and on sale in New York. Permission given in
1998 to use for illustrative purposes by the above located at 345
North Lewis Avenue, Oglesvy, Illinois 61348.
evident with regard to the education of the young.
Irish-American sensitivities over the treatment they
often received in textbooks were justified. They are
neatly demonstrated by comparing early 20th century
texts in their treatment of them and the earlier
Scotch-Irish/Ulster immigrants. In his ‘Settlement of
Londonderry’ (New Hampshire) section D.H. Montgomery spoke of the introduction of linen meaning
that ‘soon every log cabin’ echoed to ‘the hum of the
housewife’s little flax-wheel’ which ‘made cheerful and
profitable music for the family’ typical of such ‘thrifty’
folk.2
In contrast, barbed comments were made of later
(post-famine) ‘Hibernian domination’ in cities such
as New York which were the ‘worst-governed in the
civilised world’3 where stereotyped Irish ‘poured libations to their favorite saint’ and where, not surprisingly, ‘conviviality pervaded’ a ‘numerous and jovial
company’.4 The infamous ‘Molly Maguires’ and the
‘Bloody Sixth Ward Boys’5 (of Tammany) were given
suitably outraged coverage in the overtly WASP (White
Anglo-Saxon Protestant) slanted texts which had been
typical of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
One very perceptive textbook later noted that the
Irish ‘took to American life like ducks to water’ and
2 D.H. Montgomery, The Leading Facts of American History (Boston
1890) 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.
It is suggested that Irish-Americans by the 1920s were
anxious to ‘cleanse’ texts’ treatment of the American
Revolution for a number of reasons. Obviously any
pro-British slant was unacceptable to self-styled ‘children of the famine’ but this only partly explains their
enthusiasm.
In the ‘all-American’ crusade they would find
themselves linked to such respected bastions of the
WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant) establishment
as the Daughters of the American Revolution or the
super patriotic American Legion and no longer feel
excluded.
In such major Irish-American cities as New York,
Chicago and Pittsburgh there were, of course, easy
political points to be gained by established and aspiring office-seekers.
Perhaps, most importantly, the role of President
Wilson was significant. A former academic who
prided himself on his Scotch-Irish or Ulster background he had, understandably, won few friends
amongst the Irish-American community despite their
traditional Democratic leanings. In 1902 his text,
A History of the American People had indicated that he
viewed all post-famine immigrants as a ‘coarse crew’7
whilst those close to him such as Walter Hines Page
(Ambassador to Britain) went even further by describing the Irish as ‘yellow dog’ in contrast to the English
who were ‘the best race’.8 Such Anglophilia, at whatever level, understandably concerned Irish-Americans
as Wilson’s term came to its end in 1920.
An American tradition –
‘Fife and Drum’ textbooks
Throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries school
history texts had exhibited a powerful patriotic note
in keeping with the prevalent popular view of the
American Revolution’s idealistic aspirations. History
was perceived as a means by which to encourage,
especially amongst the ‘new immigrants’, the ideal of
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 in
Sidney Brown, The Irish Question in Anglo-American Relations
1914–1922 (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Bradford, 1976)
p.233.
13
14
The textbook furore in the 1920s | Sidney Brown
Paradigm 2/2
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 had
made considerable inroads into the conventionally
held simplistic notions of the Revolution as the
triumph of liberty over tyranny the stimulating work
of, for example, the Beards had not yet filtered down
to either the majority of the children’s textbook writers nor, of course, to the American public as a whole.
A typical view of George III was that he was ‘stubborn, selfish, and bigoted… determined to establish
his own selfish role and… to take people’s rights
away’.10 In this there is no hint of a rather mediocre
man trying to do what he saw as his duty, the role of
vested interests or mounting defence costs to the
British Government, the persecution of the Loyalists,
Sam Adams’ propaganda machine and the deep divisions 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 credentials in this period. Amongst them were D.H. Montgomery, William Backus Guitteau and David Saville
Muzzey.
Montgomery’s somewhat grimly titled The Leading
Facts of American History (Ginn & Company, Boston)
held a dominant position from its date of publication
in 1890 in many of the nation’s schools until well into
the 1920s. Prefaced with Emerson’s ‘America is
another word for Opportunity’ the work has a clear
‘user-friendly’ format with neat subdivisions, beautiful
black and white engraved illustrations and appears
never to over-simplify in its effort to present a
balanced view to its youthful readers.
Guitteau was the Director of Schools in Toledo,
Ohio. His Our United States: A History plainly stated
that ‘History teaching worthy of the name no longer
tolerates the mere recital of facts, dates, and names
…’ and the text holds true to this idea with its
emphasis on analysis and evaluation of the material
presented in an effort to ‘foster loyalty to the best
American traditions.’11 His chapter on the Revolution, for example is supplemented with an
illuminating list of references for teachers from such
authors as Edward Channing and Albert B. Hart who
held conflicting views on the subject.12
9 Two especially useful works on American history texts together
provide a rich and often amusing wealth of materials. They are Ray
Allen Billington, The Historian’s Contribution to Anglo-American
Misunderstanding (Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1966) and
Frances FitzGerald, America Revised (Little, Brown & Company,
Boston, 1979).
3. A ‘minute man’.
The resilience of texts written by David Saville
Muzzey is remarkable. Professor of History at the
prestigious Columbia University, New York, his first
text An American History (Ginn & Company, New
York) originally appeared in 1911. Although his
publisher made several title changes, a Muzzey text
was available in every subsequent decade upto 1966!
It is not difficult to explain Muzzey’s success. His
prose is lively, dramatic and often exciting. He does
not shrink from making judgements, linking American politics firmly to British traditions. Phrases such
as ‘the English race’ are liberally and warmly sprinkled
in the early editions of his texts. His English ancestry,
perhaps, partly explains his choice of such chapter
sub-headings as ‘Napoleon Bonaparte the tyrant of
Europe’ when he is preparing his readers for an explanation of the hallowed War of 1812.13
In similarly clear and confident vein Muzzey’s
approach to the American Revolution implies that it
was a separation from the ‘Mother Country’ which
was, of course, a view most commonly held at the
time (for that matter by such notables as Washington
who he admired) rather than the diplomatic equivalent of immaculate conception! Muzzey’s highly
personalised, sharp commentary continues to impress
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 textbook furore in the 1920s | Sidney Brown
Paradigm 2/2
4. Washington before the revolution.
as one of the brightest examples of textbook writing
to this day.
However in 1921 a law was proposed in the New
York Assembly for the suppression of sedition in
schools. As well as attacking ‘radical’ teachers it gave
attention to educational materials such as texts which
were considered ‘unpatriotic’ especially in their treatment of the Republic’s early years.
At the National Congress of the Sons of the American Revolution a similar view was taken of textbooks.
The group proposed that textbooks should show a
clear sympathy with the principles of the American
Revolution. In 1923 the New York legislature passed
the 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 events
leading up to the declaration of American Independence, or connected with the American Revolution or
the spirit and determination with which the United
States has established, defended and maintained its
rights 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 American
Patriots, or questions the worthiness of their motives,
or casts aspersions on their lives.
14 ‘Proposed Bill’, School and Society, March 31, 1923, p.349.
15 Montgomery, The Leading Facts, p.159.
5. America.
Section 681. Enforcement of the provisions of this article. The Commissioner of Education shall supervise
the enforcement of the provisions of this article and he
shall withhold all public school funds from any city or
district which, in his judgement, wilfully omits and
refuses to enforce the provisions of this act.14
Amongst the books cited were the works of Montgomery, Guitteau and Muzzey to which reference has
been made. Perhaps because they were in fairly wide
use throughout the United States, the three works
were rightly seen as both important and potentially
influential targets for those concerned with what they
perceived questions of loyalty and patriotism.
However, ‘disloyal’ Montgomery’s prose appeared
to his critics it is interesting to observe that his choice
of illustrative material remains true to the American
dream. In his chapter on ‘The first continental
congress’ appears a striking portrait of an obviously
alert ‘Minute Man’ ready to do battle with the British
actually putting powder in his fire-piece! 15
As if this was not sufficient proof of his patriotism
Montgomery waxed lyrical in his description of the
Boston Tea Party speaking of ‘the wrath of the king’s
party’ which ‘rose to white heat’ whilst, in contrast,
the mood of the Continental Congress was ‘perfectly
calm, perfectly respectful but perfectly determined’16
in its deliberations. The exact basis for his judgement
is uncertain but the impression it was designed to
16 Montgomery, The Leading Facts, pp.158–159.
15
16
The textbook furore in the 1920s | Sidney Brown
Paradigm 2/2
6. Warren G. Harding.
7. Colonists burning the stamp seller in effigy.
make on the minds of young American readers is
obvious. His work displayed a familiar portrait of
Washington opposite its title page as well as a less well
known picture of him before the Revolution together
with a laudatory mini-biography containing not a
hint of adverse comment.17
Rather more controversially Guitteau’s text’s first
illustration does not depict Washington but opts for
Daniel Chester French’s sculpture of ‘America’ revealing, one assumes, an acceptable progressive quality
but also including the Indian in the background to
whom the author draws attention for he is ‘gazing
with 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 the
recently deceased and remarkably mediocre President
Harding. The caption underneath his portrait makes,
it seems, the very best of what was available with the
phrase that Harding’s life ‘affords another illustration
of what may be accomplished in our democracy by a
comparatively poor boy’.19
The extent to which Guitteau’s tongue was in his
cheek at this time is impossible to know. He was at
pains to point out in his preface that ‘our teaching of
history should emphasize… the peculiar and characteristic genius of American institutions’20 and then
wisely fell back on a proven hero, Washington, ‘a stalwart man’ whose ‘noble bearing and strong handsome
face proclaimed the moral qualities greatly needed in
his hour.’21
Thankfully Guitteau added to this rather anaemic
section a touch of excitement with a somewhat startling depiction of ‘Colonists burning the stamp seller
in effigy’ complete with a juvenile patriot well to the
fore.22
Perhaps it would have suited anxious politicians,
patriotic Irish-Americans and the rest if Muzzey had
included such famous (albeit misleading) pictures as
A. Willard’s Spirit of ’76 and Emanuel Leutze’s ‘Washington crossing the Delaware’ (both painted in the
late 19th century) in his section on the American
Revolution. Oddly his ‘Group of revolutionary Buildings’23 choice seems an illustration destined to cause
no controversy at all save perhaps that it could appear
disturbingly tame to its ‘fife and drum’ detractors!
The role of British impressment of American
seamen as a (or perhaps the) cause of the War of 1812
remains contested but the seemingly unreliable ‘unpatriotic’ stance of Muzzey is barely evident in his
choice of an illustration of a couple of burly British
sailors dragging away an unhappy American
seaman.24
Notwithstanding such later British bullying
Muzzey was at pains to mention ‘The liberality of
England’s terms’ in his section heading on events
immediately after Yorktown and dared to omit altogether mention of such national heroes as Nathan
Hale and Paul Revere as well as belittling such battles
as Saratoga and King’s Mountain. Whether his inclusion of Washington’s famous description of the American Tories/Loyalists as ‘detestable parricides’25
soothed the patriotic critics of his work is doubtful
one suspects.
17 Montgomery, pp.136–137.
18 Guitteau, frontispiece.
19 Guitteau, p.636.
20 Guitteau, p.v.
21 Guitteau, p.168.
22 Guitteau, p.159.
Unabashed Anglophobia
and Irish-American votes
The spirit of the period is beautifully summed up by
the president of the Idaho Society of the Grand Army
of the Republic:
23 Muzzey, p.131.
24 Muzzey, p.181.
25 Muzzey, p.130.
Paradigm 2/2
8. A Swap of forms
Discussion of controversial subjects has no place in
history, it should not be found in a single school in the
United States…. I want our school children taught
that our forefathers were right and the British were
wrong on the subject of taxation.26
The inevitable result of this approach, one
commentator, forecast would be history written under
the joint supervision of the American Legion, Elks,
American Federation of Labor, Boy Scouts, YMCA
YWCA. and the Daughters of the American Revolution! If this were the case, he argued, no critical
history 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. Its
mayor, William Hale Thompson, having threatened
to punch King George V on the ‘snoot’ should he
visit then turned his attention to His Majesty’s ancestor, George III. Showing more fervour than he was
ever to demonstrate in bringing the Capone empire to
heel he sallied forth in print to do battle with some of
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.
The textbook furore in the 1920s | Sidney Brown
the age’s best historians in an effort to ‘purify’ the
texts.28
From New York too, unsurprisingly, came strong
expressions of concern with regard to British machinations. During the Great War groups of Irish- Americans organised in such associations as ‘The Friends of
Irish Freedom’ had become increasingly embittered at
the conduct of ‘Scotch/Ulster-Irish’ President Wilson
and his reluctance to press satisfactorily Ireland’s
claims towards complete self-determination.29
By the 1920s the former leaders of such groups
continued to vent their fury on what they perceived
as a growing Anglophilia. A New York judge, Daniel
F. Cohalan was especially active. In the Pittsburgh
Dispatch Cohalan harked back as he darkly asked:
‘What would have happened to Washington had he
failed?’ suggesting that Washington might have faced
the ultimate punishment for ‘When Cromwell and
the English Parliament got hold of Charles I from the
Scotch (sic) they promptly beheaded him’30 leaving his
readers to draw their own conclusions! The obviously
rather garbled and over-simplified foray into British
history was, perhaps, made more piquant by the
example of Charles I and Cromwell in that a great
deal of the American Revolution’s rationale drew
heavily from parliamentary assertiveness in the
Stuart period.
As if this was not enough the News Letter of the
Friends of Irish Freedom warned: ‘It is about time
that America wakes up to the conditions with which
she is confronted at this time… plans are being made
to educate our children along the lines of British
democracy… the public observance of Magna Charta
(sic) Day at the Episcopal Cathedral, New York (June
14) is another straw that indicates the direction of the
wind’.31
It would seem that a whole variety of organisations
emerged in the decade in order to alert Americans to
the dangers of British plotting whether it was at work
in the League of Nations, the World Court or the
nation’s textbooks. One representative group, the ‘All
America National Council’ had its headquarters in
Washington D.C. and its membership appeared to
comprise mainly Irish-Americans and GermanAmericans.32
Thus in the 1920s such groups united with the
American Legion and the Daughters of the American
Revolution assisted by the valuable support provided
30 Pittsburgh Dispatch, February 21, 1920, p.3. Like New York and
Chicago, Pennsylvania’s main industrial city had a large IrishAmerican 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 of
an Irish American Leader (University of Maryland, USA, MA
thesis, 1967) p.128.
17
18
The textbook furore in the 1920s | Sidney Brown
by the Hearst press. In the pursuit of ‘One hundred
per cent Americanism’ the Spirit of ’76 was, of course,
regularly drawn upon: ‘Whose advice is likely to be
the wisest, the advice of Washington… Jefferson…
or Lloyd George?’33
Fighting paper tigers
On balance it appears that the critics of 1920s school
texts were over-sensitive in the case of such authors
as Montgomery, Guitteau and Muzzey. These three
authors demonstrated powerful patriotic qualities
when they dealt with the American Revolution and
its immediate consequences. But to their credit they
rarely descended to the strident ‘fife and drum’
approach which had characterised their 19th century
predecessors or, for that matter, their post-World
War II successors.
The refreshingly balanced and moderate quality
Montgomery, Guitteau and Muzzey revealed was
obviously not sufficient to satisfy the demands of the
‘One hundred per cent Americanism’ crusade which
was, of course, to concern itself with even weightier
matters 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 textbook
furore:
Citizens… must learn what has been done by their
predecessors, and what the consequences were; otherwise they will be at the mercy of the demagogues who
advocate some course of action that has been tried and
repeatedly proven a failure…. A wise father attempts to
draw from his own experiences and mistakes lessons
that will be useful for the guidance of his children. In
writing the history of this country, we expect to do the
same for our young people, the future citizens.34
Perhaps Munro was a little off target. This was the
decade when the serious zealots had fixed their sights
on such threats to the American way as John Thomas
Scopes together with Sacco and Vanzetti. They could
not be concerned only with mere textbook authors
and their paper tigers!
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 Truthful
History,’ Current History, XXVI (February, 1928) pp.632–635.
Paradigm 2/2
Acknowledgements
In the research for this article the author wishes to
express gratitude to the British Academy for financial
assistance.