Suggestions and critique concerning the essay on the subject of "Events of 1861; their importance and influence." Being a review of the Medal essay, and the award of the gold medal from the U.D.C. Committee; preface, correspondence, and review

J'REKATORY RE.MARKS.
'I'n the United Ihniglitcrs of 'tie Ccnfcdcrticv f<>!' the Sttite <>/
(H corgi a:
"HISTORY." Jn Webster's Dictionary the definition of "his tory" is given as follows: "A written statement of what is known to have occurred: a record of the past; a narrative of events; a true story, in distinction from a romance; a statement of the progress of a nation, with philosophical inquiries respecting ef fects and causes, in distinction from annals, which relate simply the facts and events of each year, in strict chronological order. without any observations of the annalist."
"History is a methodical record of important events which concern a community of men. usually so arranged as to show the connection of causes and effects."
"./ chronicle is a record of such events, when it conforms to the order of time as its distinctive feature."
".-Innals are a chronicle divided out into distinct years." The subject of essay which was given for the children of schools in Georgia in 1905-1906, "Events of 1861 ; Their Importance and Influence," may he classed as a subject for a "chronicle," partaking of the character of annals, distinctly as to the year 1861. In writing an essay on that subject, the "events" of any other year are not pertinent. Incorrect statements with refer ence to any events, either in that year, or as to any other time. or with regard to subject-matter of other events, can not be ;: "true story," or the truth of history.
That the essay, for which the gold medal was awarded, con lained incorrect statements, is apparent on a careful examination of the facts of history concerning the "Events of 1861." To di rect your attention to the statements, and to offer corrections, ami to vindicate the cause and truth of history, I present this criticism before the "United Daughters of the Confederacy." I preser'. it respectfully, and they can treat it and use it as they may choose to do, either to accept the corrections, and deal with the rned;.! award, and let n= bavf Justice and fair olav. and the truth, or else ',-),( IIP. . vitii.-i.m. ;i-.> i 1^ the vu.-.::: ; rtv;.i ; .;:r.<l a.- it h?.~ , );een nuilc uj'M.r'. . .ir.'mrUtje.
Persr.r.rjly, n cau r.oi nc-v aftVct ivr "iu >.-u > the other. 1

2

simply place the matter before you, to act as you please. If you

prefer to allow a clouded award of error to stand as a shadow

over truth, to thwart the endeavors of diligent students, so let it

be, but eventually the error must give way before the sunlight of

truth.

'

"Truth is mighty, and will prevail."

'*

*

*

*

"Truth crushed to earth shall rise again,
The eternal years of God are hers; But Error, wounded, writhes in pain, - And dies amid her worshipers."

Respectfully submitted. For the honor of true history, for love of country, and with faith in God, I am,
Very truly yours,
RUTH RODGERS. 276 Ashby Street, Atlanta. Ga., October 25, 1906.

COMMUNICATION.
To the United Daughters of the Confederacy of the State of Georgia, and to All Whom It May Concern.
MY DEAR LADIES AND "MOTHERS": With my compliments, as your humble and sincere little friend and "sister and child" in the cause of Confederate memories and history, permit me to re spectfully invite your individual and united attention to a mat ter that may be of some importance.
You are aware of the history essay contests of "Children of the Confederacy," and school students, and the medal award. In the contest of the year 1906, I entered as one of the essayists, on the subject of "Events of 1861; Their Importance and Influ ence," My essay was one of the successful papers for the county prizes given by Professor W. B. Merritt. It was considered as the best from Fulton county, and the prize book was given to me. My essay was sent forward for consideration, amongst the others of "best," to contest for the State prizes a gold medal, offered by your society, the "U. D. C.," and a gold coin of ten dollars offered by Miss Rutherford, of Athens.
Of course I do not know of the relative merits of all the vari ous essays. I do not know the names of all the various essayists in the contest. It seems that names of all but two of the contest ants have been withheld, or suppressed. Their essays have not appeared before the public. I do not know how, when, where, or by whom they were examined and considered. I can not claim that my own essay excelled all the others in the contest. The contestants and you have not seen them, neither have we heard of them specifically. Those two for which the prizes were awarded have been published in the Alanta Constitution. I observed er rors in the essay for which the medal was awarded. I felt dis posed to make review of the "medal essay." I presented my criticism to the Chairman of the Medal Committee, in June, very soon after the medal essay was published, but no answer came till I made a request for my paper, in September. The answer is herewith presented to you with this communication.
I beg leave, as I think it is my duty,, as well as privilege, to present the whole matter to you. I appeal to the State Chapter of the United Daughters of the Confederncv. \Vhv should the

medal be awarded to an essay of errors? And why should the truth about it be suppressed ? I do not care now for the medal, or the $10 coin. I would not now accept either, if they might be recalled, evert if my essay, on a fair consideration, might be en titled to such an award. It is not for the medal nor the gold coin that I now make this appeal to you, but for the sake of the plain truth of our history. I most respectfully ask that you make a thorough investigation of the facts as stated in the "Medal Essay," for which the medal was awarded, and then of my own statements in review of it, and decide for yourselves, and for the sake of truth, whether or not the "Medal Essay" contained correct statements, or errors, as to the "Events of 1861."
Also, by what authority, or course of reason, were the rules of the contest changed so as to divide the prizes, after the con test had been carried on and closed? I presented my criticism to the editor of the Constitution. There it was declined, and I was told to present it to the State Editor of the "U. D. C." De partment. I did so, and there I was told that it must go to the Chairman of the Medal Committee. I had already sent it there, and it has not been returned, and it seems that it can not be pro duced. I sent a copy to the Madam President of the Atlanta Chapter, and as yet no answer has come to that communication.
I retained a cop}-, from which the accompanying printed copy is made, to present to you, and to all who may be interested or concerned about it. and so I have decided to take this course to bring this matter to your special attention. It shall be printed and published, even if it is thought to be inadvisable to do so. Why should an essay of errors be published and praised for ex cellence, and let a review of corrections be suppressed? Is the truth not wanted, and is it to be positively ignored, because of the error of some one in making an incorrect award? Is that fair to your contestants? Is it the right way to promote the truth of our Confederate history?
If the "Daughters of the Confederacy" intend to ignore the
facts, and if they can allow such award of their medals to stand as their owtt award, then I shall not have any interest in any future contest for medals for history essays. The medal and coin are insignificant in comparison with the real truth of our
history. An award of success for an essay so full of errors, which may mislead so many students of history, is a serious mistake. If the "United-Daughters of the Confederacy" can sanction such inaccuracy and such method of inculcating errors

in history, then I can not pursue any such course. I respectfully submit it to you. With sincere good wishes, I am,
Very truly yours, RUTH RODGERS,
Member of the "Julia Jackson Chapter" of "Children of the Confederacy," Atlanta, Georgia.
P. O. Address 276 Asliby Street, Atlanta, Ga.
(COPY.)
ATLANTA, GA., September 5, 1906.
Mr. Charles .VIortin Trulock, Climax, Ga.
SIR: Though a stranger I am to you, I trust that you will properly understand and appreciate my venture to write a letter to you, and to present to you the accompanying article concern ing the essay on "Important Events of 1861," for which a medal was given to you last June. As I was one of the essayists in that contest, I feel that it is my privilege to write to you concerning it. I beg leave respectfully to invite your special attention to my review of your essay. Will you examine it, and then say whether or not your essay was correct, or my review of it? As to the medal, I suppose your own conscience and judgment of right will direct you to decide about retaining it. I leave that entirely to your own discretion as a student of the truth of history, and as a youthful and fair contestant. Do as you like about it. I do not care for the medal, and I do not claim it, and I now would not have it, if tendered to me. I would prefer to have the honor of the correction of the numerous errors in the favored essay, rather than to wear the medal on an award made by improper favor, or by lack of knowledge of the truth.
Respectfully I beg leave to present to you my review of your ''Medal Essay." If you can wear the medal in good conscience, please take my review in good spirit. In years to come, when we all may be older, and more advanced in history, this review may be good for you.
I will take occasion soon to bring this matter to the attention of the State Chapter of the Daughters of the Confederacy, in their Department of History.
Very respectfully, RUTH RODGERS.
276 Ashby Street, Atlanta. Ga.

(COPY.)
ATLANTA, GA., September 5, 1906.
Miss Eugenia Mandeville, Carrollton, Ga.
DEAR MADAM : In last June I wrote a letter to you requesting your attention to the errors of the "Medal Essay" of Mr. Tru.lock. I sent to you a copy of my criticism of the essay, asking you to have it published. The only answer that I have received from you was a few words on a postal card, saying you received the letter and article, and would answer "as soon as possible." Has it not been "possible" yet for you to answer? The "Medal Essay" was so full of errors that it can not be understood why the medal was awarded for it, unless for its errors only. It con tained nothing else of importance.
Will you please return to me my article in review? I will take some other course to have it considered. If the "Daughters of the Confederacy" intend to allow such award to stand as their own award, then I will not have any interest in any future con test in history essays.
The medal is insignificant in comparison with the truth of his tory. An award of success for an essay so full of errors, which may mislead so many students of history, is a serious mistake. If the "Daughters of the Confederacy" can sanction such method of inculcating history, then I can not follow any such course.
Please return my article. Very respectfully,
RUTH RODGERS. Address 276 Ashby Street, Atlanta, Ga.
CARROLLTON, GA., September 10, 1906.
Miss Ruth Rodgers, Atlanta, Ga.
MY DEAR Miss RODGERS: The delay in aswering your letter of June has been due to my inability to obtain repossession of. your letters and criticism. These were sent to the various mem bers of the committee for consideration, and in each case were returned to me in due time, until they reached one member. She was out of the State, but received my letter and answered it, though without returning enclosures. I have been endeavoring to get hold of papers again, but so far have been unsuccessful, and, indeed, do not know whether my letters ever reached the

proper person. I am still trying to obtain your article, and if I do, will be pleased to return it immediately.
Without waiting for that, however, I can give you the opinion of the majority of the committee as to your appeal. The com mittee regrets exceedingly that any necessity for criticism has arisen, but it feels that the decision having been made, and the prizes awarded, no reconsideration is possible, even if desired. The committee thinks best to stand by its award. It also deems it inadvisable to print your article, as no benefit can come from its publication. This is the view of the principal members of the committee. The holding of your papers lias given the other two members no opportunity of seeing your criticism.
I trust you will not abide by your decision to remain out of the contest another year. Mrs. Van Hoose, of Gainesville, the Chairman of the Medal Committee, is a stranger to me, but I am sure she would have not been appointed to the position, if not fully competent. Miss Mildred Rutherford, of Athens, the final referee in judging papers is, of course, well known to you.
Very truly,
EUCEXIA MAXDEVILI,E.
THE MEDAL ESSAY OX EVENTS OF 1861.
Mditor of the Constitution, and Daughters of the Confederacy:
Will you kindly allow me to make reference to the matter of the essay which was published last Sunday in the Constitution concerning the subject of the "Events of 1861; their Importance and Influence?" As I thought I was in that contest for the medal, and as the book offered by Professor Merritt was awarded to me for Fulton county, I presume I may have the right, and I ask the privilege, to offer a few suggestions with regard to the essay for the State medal that was awarded to Mr. Trulock. I entered that contest, as I supposed, under the rules as published. I was in formed that the contest was to be for a medal for an essay on the "Main Events of 1861; their Importance and Influence." I presented an essay, which was considered tjy the local committee in this county, and I received the book that was offered by Pro fessor Merritt. I have been informed that something over three hundred essays were presented for consideration, and from this

8
number forty-three as the best were selected. In that forty-three was the one that was presented by me.
I am informed that my essay was delayed somewhere. I do not know how, or where, or by whom it was considered for the medal contest, or whether it was even examined or considered at all. The matter now to which I desire to invite special attention is the winning essay. I notice in it many inaccuracies, and it treats of events which did not occur in the year 1861. Let us notice some of them.
On the topic of "Secession" Mr. Trulock says, first, "South Carolina led off in December." That was in December, 1860. That was not an event of 1861. He then names several States which, he says, "followed in January," and names Texas as one of the States which, he says, "followed in January." "Texas did not secede in January, 1861. It was on the first of ' February, 1861, when the Texas convention adopted the ordi nance of secession, which provided that the issue should be sub mitted to a ballot, or election, by the people, and the vote was taken on the 23d of February. The result of the election was in favor of secession by a vote of 39,415 "For Secession" and 13,841 "Against Secession." On the fourth day of March, (the same day of the inauguration of President Lincoln,) Gov. Sam Houston issued his proclamation that a majority of the votes in the election had been cast "For Secession," and declared Texas as out of the Union, and as a free and independentState. On the next day, March 5, 1861, the Texas convention passed an ordi nance for the union of Texas with the Southern Confederacy. An interesting article on "General Sam Houston," by Senator Culberson, of Texas, is in Scribner's Magazine of May, 1906. So the secession of Texas was not a January event of 1861,
Then he mentions the seizing of the Southern Forts, Sumter and Pickens. These were not the first forts seized, but Forts Pulaski and Jackson, at Savannah, and the United States arsenal, at Augusta, in Georgia; Fort Mason in North Carolina, Fort Morgan and the United States arsenal at Mobile, Ala.; Forts Johnson and Caswell, in North Carolina, the Pensacola navy yard and Fort Barrancas, in Florida; Fort Kearney, in Kansas, and Fort Brown, in Texas, were all seized previous to the taking of Forts Sumter and Pickens.
"The Medal Essay" then goes on to say: "Just here let us pause and consider another event sthe almost complete downfall of the Democratic party." Let me say that the "downfall" was not simply "almost." but.it was indeed thoroughly "complete,"

but that, again, was not an event of 1861. The "complete down fall" of the Democratic party, occurred in 1860. One of the books which we were directed to read in this contest was the "War Be tween the States," by Hon. Alexander H. Stephens. I have read it. The author discusses the Charleston convention of 1860, and. treating of the discord and confusion in the Democratic party, he relates the incidents as they occurred in Charleston and Balti more, and then he says: "The rupture of the Democratic party was^ therefore, now complete." See Stephens's "War Between the States," volume 2, pages 273. 274 and 275. That event was
in 1860, and was not an event of 1861. ''The Medal Essay'' then goes on to say: ''The North had
three times as many men as the South," etc. That is stating a condition which is hardly an "event" of 1861; but if so, then it is incorrect, because statistics show that the difference in numbers of men was more than four to one in the totals during the war. The Xorth had 2.865,028. while the South had less than 700,000.
Hut that, also, was not an event of 1861. The first battle of the war was not "Bull Run" or "Manassas."
There had been several important engagements before that; the battle of "Big Bethel," or "Great Bethel," being then the most important, it having occurred on the loth of June, 1861, which was a Confederate victory, more than a month before the battle of Bull Run. Mr. Stephens says, volume 2, page 465. "These movements were all made at nearly the same time in the latter part of May. When the Confederate Congress met on the 2oth of July the affairs of Barboursville. Scarrytown. Gralton, Philippi. Laurel Hill. Cheat River, Alexandria and Big Bethel had all transpired. In all these operations the result had been favorable to the Confederates, except those under the direction of General McClellan. The signal victory of D. H. Hill at Big Bethel on the 9th (it was loth) of June, he having then only the commis sion of Colonel, more than compensated for these in its moral effect."
Then the "Medal Essay" goes on to give another event that is not pertinent to the subject in hand. It says: "The fall of Fort Donelson was a severe blow to the South." That may be true, but that was not an event of 1861. Fort Donelson was captured by the Federals, under General Grant, on the i6th of February. 1862, with 9.000 Confederates, some reports have it u.coo. others 13,000 or 14,000 soldiers, under Gen. S. B. Buckner, taken as prisoners. So the fall of Fort Donelson' was not an event of 1861. See "Short Historv of the Confederate States

10
of America," by Jefferson Davis, chapter 19. See, also, the full report of Gen. S. B. Buckner on the battle and surrender of Fort Donelson on Sunday, February 16, 1862, in the "Confederate Soldiers in the Civil War." See Professor Berry's "Story of the Confederacy." See, also, the current school histories.
"The Medal Essay" then goes on to tell us that "One great event of that memorable year, 1861, was the resignation of his post at West Point by R. E. Lee, the Southland's purest, best, and most highly honored son." Now these fine qualities, as adjectives, are all right as eulogy of General Lee; but they are not events of 1861. Further in error, R. E. Lee did not resign his post at West Point in 1861. He was superintendent at West Point Military Academy from 1852 to 1855; in that latter year he was assigned to other duty in the regular army. After that he was in army duty out West as Colonel of the First Cavalry regiment, and was in command of the Department of Texas. In February, 1861, just before the election by the people of Texas on the question of "Secession," Col. R. E. Lee was ordered from his post at Fort Mason to report to Gen. Winfield Scott, in Wash ington City. He obeyed the order, and went on to Washington, JUKI had an interview with General Scott. It was soon after that time, and after the presidential inauguration, that President Lincoln offered to Col. R. E. Lee the command of the United States army, which offer General Scott urged him to accept, and which Colonel Lee declined. He then went to his home at Arlington, and from there he wrote to General Scott that he had determined to resign from the army, and on the same day, April 30, 1861, he wrote his laconic letter of resignation to Secretary of War, as follows :
"ARLINGTON., WASHINGTON CITY P. O., April 20, 1861.
Honorable Simon Caincron, Secretary of /Far:
I have the honor to tender the resignation of my commission as Colonel of the First Regiment of Cavalry.
R. E. LEE,
Colonel First Cavalry.''
So Col. R. E. Lee was not at West Point in 1861, and did not rtsign his "post in West Point in 1861." So such statement of event of 1861 -was error.
It may be true that our mothers "did weep and weave," and it

11

may yet come about that \ve Children of ihe Confederacy may have a crying match; but, then, that can not ever be an event of

1861.
Xo\v, Mr. Editor, and Ladies of the U. D. C., do you see how this analysis of the ''-Medal Essay" may leave it almost without

any event of 1861 ? Is there any \vay to make an appeal from the decision of the award of medal and coin, or can there be a writ of error, or bill of exceptions, to another tribunal-for the cor rection of the errors herein indicated? Who were the judges on

this contest for the medal on "The Events of 1861 ?" \Yhen and where did they convene to examine the several essays? Is it possible that our historical works are so much at variance on

these several topics? I am informed that one of the selected judges of the contest did not act in the examination of these essays for the State medal. How was that vacancv on the com

mittee supplied? Miss Field, as an historian, certainly could not have consented to such a decision on the merits of such an essay. May I ask for a review ? May I call for a reconsideration ? Let

us care more for the truth of history, in our studies and in our essays, than for the mere glitter of a gold medal or a little coin, or for the ephemeral glamor of a flitting reputation.
Please kindly excuse me for the length of this communication. but it could not very well he made shorter and appropriately state the facts.

June 22, 1906.

Very respectfully,
RUTH RODGERS.

P. O. Address 276 Ashby street, Atlanta, Ga.