NOTE: The following are excerpts from Congressional Records that were presented in congress by Mr. Thorkelson, U.S. Representative from Montana to the Seventy-sixth Congress (January 3, 1939-January 3, 1941):

 

HON. J. THORKELSON:

 

Part A — pages 5580 through 5582

Mr. Speaker, I have taken the liberty of marking these articles, in which I am discussing changes in school histories, A, B, C, D, and so forth, and my reason for so doing is not to evade the regulations of the House concerning printing but simply to identify these articles.

Each article is complete in itself; and while publishing them may entail some cost, there should be no objection, inasmuch as we have appropriated fourteen and a half billion dollars to launch this country into an unnecessary war, which will, if we enter into it, cost millions of lives and billions in property.

My remarks are inserted in the RECORD for the sole purpose of informing the people of the actual conditions that exist today, so that in the knowledge of these facts they may demand that this Nation remain at peace. The cost of the printing therefore is not an expense, but it is, instead, an investment which I hope will lead toward national se­curity. All information which I have inserted in the RECORD is authenticated and based upon facts, much of which is in my possession or in the Congressional Library, where Mem­bers of Congress may verify my statements.

My interest in the matter which I have placed in the RECORD is not political but is, instead, to shed light upon those whose interest is in foreign nations instead of the United States.

 

Part B — pages 5583 through 5586

Mr. Speaker, I have included these articles with my remarks in order to call the attention of Members of Congress and the parents of our American boys and girls to these changes in our textbooks, as I am sure all patriotic citizens are interested in retaining the true American history in our public schools.

 Part C — pages 5588 through 5590

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous con­sent to extend my own remarks and include articles from the report of David Hirshfleld relating to books by William Backus Guitteau, director of schools, Toledo, Ohio, and O. H. Ward, Taft School, Watertown, Conn., entitled “Our United States,” and “Burke’s Speech on Conciliation,” respectively.

OUR UNITED STATES, 1919-REVISED, 1923

(By William Backus Guitteau, Ph. D., director of schools, Toledo, Ohio)

In the announcement of the 1919 edition of this textbook its publishers stated:

“This book has been written in the light of recent events in which a new atmosphere has been created for the study of our national life.

“The Revolutionary War and subsequent Anglo-American difficul­ties, hitherto distorted in our schoolbooks as a result of national prejudice, have been restated by Dr. Guitteau.

“Many events involved in the history of our foreign relations, hitherto distorted in our schoolbooks through an unthinking ad­herence to traditional prejudices, have been restated by Dr. Guit­teau in their true light.”

Professor Guitteau, in his preface, elaborated upon this promise to correct in our school children the “unthinking adherence to traditional prejudices,” as follows:

“The momentous events of the last 5 years have demonstrated conclusively that our history textbooks must be written from a new viewpoint. *  *  *

“The American Revolution, for example, is no longer to be studied as an isolated event resulting from British injustice.

“So with the War of 1812, which takes on a new aspect when viewed as an incident in the Napoleonic Wars rather than as a British-American contest.

“Throughout this book, therefore, special emphasis has been placed upon the relation of the United States to other countries, in order that the young citizens who study it may realize more fully the importance of our world relations: and our world responsibili­ties.  *  *  *

“In this way an impartial judgment may be passed upon our international relations” (p. V).

Accordingly, throughout this text for the instruction of American school children the long-accepted versions of the treatment of the Colonies by England and the inspiring references and descriptions of our national heroes, ideals, and achievements are eliminated, and matters more in harmony with the “light of recent events,” in­tended to wipe out “unthinking adherence to traditional preju­dices,” are substituted.

To the credit of Professor Guitteau, it must be said that, like Prof. Everett Barnes, he has seen a new light since my investi­gation of his history has been made, because in his 1923 edition he has revised his textbook.

 

Part D — pages 5593 through 5596

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous con­sent to extend my own remarks and include an article from the report of David Hirshfield, relating to a book by Albert Bushnell Hart, LL. D., Professor of Government, Harvard University, entitled “School History of the United States.”

                SCHOOL HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES-REVISED, 1920

This book is said to be among the history texts most extensively in use throughout the United States, and it is one of those most seriously complained against.

 

Part E — pages 5598 through 5600

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous con­sent to extend my own remarks and include an article from the report of David Hirshfield relating to a book by Andrew C. McLaughlin, head of the Department of History, University of Chicago, and Claude H. Van Tyne, head of the Department of History, University of Michigan, entitled “A History of the United States for Schools.”

Objections submitted and sustained against the McLaughlin and Van Tyne text are that it teaches:

That there is little use trying to learn whose fault it was that the Revolutionary War began;

That the Declaration of Independence was largely plagiarized from English writings;

That the United States Constitution was copied after the British Constitution;

That many of the long-cherished stories in American history are “yarns”;

That many revered patriot leaders were disreputable characters;

That many of our most inspiriting slogans are not genuine;

That “we can afford now to laugh at our forefathers.”

Objection has been made that in this textbook the British oppressions of the American colonists are so plausibly condoned or completely suppressed that no ground is left which seems to justify the statement of grievances in the Declaration of Independence or the armed resistance in Revolution.

It has been further charged that the history of the American Revolution is in this text reshaped to conform with definite British propaganda for the cultivation of the “international mind” in behalf of imperialistic interests and that its teachings to American children are poisonous to their patriotic spirit.

In the preface these authors proclaim:

“We make no apology for the omission of many of the ‘yarns’ of American history.  *  *  *

 

Part F and G — pages 5644 through 5647

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous con­sent to extend my own remarks and include articles from the report of David Hirshfield relating to books by David Saville Muzzey, Ph. D., Barnard College, Columbia University; and Everett Barnes, A. M.

AN AMERICAN HISTORY-REVISED, 1920

Excerpts from report of David Hirshfleld relating to book by David Saville Muzzey, Ph. D., Barnard College, Columbia University)

This history is subject to severe criticism from many sources and many viewpoints. The opening sentence of the preface is as follows:

“The present volume represents the newer tendencies in historical writing. Its aim is not to tell over once more the old story in the old way, but to give the emphasis to those factors in our national development which appeal to us as most vital from the standpoint of today.”

It was contended by the critics who appeared before me, that “the newer tendencies in historical writing,” proclaimed and followed by Professor Muzzey, are pro-British. Many passages were cited in this book to prove that the author has no abiding conviction in Ameri­can fundamentals, or in the just causes of the Revolution, nor any wholesome veneration for the great men who founded our Republic.

On page 90 of his history, in treating of the American Revolution, Professor Muzzey says:

“This great event has too often been represented as the unani­mous uprising of a downtrodden people to repel the deliberate, un­provoked attack of a tyrant upon their liberties; but when thou­sands of people in the Colonies could agree with a noted lawyer of Massachusetts that the Revolution was a ‘causeless, wanton, wicked rebellion,’ and thousands of people in England could applaud Pitt’s denunciation of the war against America as ‘barbarous, unjust, and diabolical,’ it is evident that, at the time at least, there were two opinions as to colonial rights and British oppression.”

Most adult Americans were brought up in the belief that the American Revolution was rather a glorious affair, that Burke’s char­acterization of the “fierce spirit of liberty” that animated the fore-­fathers of the Republic was no mere figure of speech; and that Abraham Lincoln spoke the truth when he described it as a “nation conceived in liberty.” Our children, however, if permitted to gain their knowledge of the early history of their country from text­books such as Muzzey’s, will learn something quite different than did their parents.

 

Part H and I — pages 5615 through 5618

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous con­sent to extend my own remarks and include articles from the report of David Hirshfield, relating to a book by Willis Mason West, sometime professor of history and head of the depart­ment in the University of Minnesota, and an article entitled "Resolutions of Patriotic Organizations."

HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLF-1911;

(By Willis Mason West, sometime professor of history and head of the department in the University of Minnesota)

The complaints against this text from many sources are that its author is an outright propagandist, endeavoring zealously to pro­mote the British design of an Anglo-American union.

The New York City school committee, in its report of this author, says:

"Mr. West presents only the views of the counsel for the crown.

"The writer is constantly finding defense for the course of action taken by the British Government. The American side of the argu­ment is entirely ignored.

"No Wedderburn, no crown advocate could plead the British cause in a more bitterly partisan spirit than West has done."

Notwithstanding, West's book continues on the authorized list for use in the New York schools.

Professor West proclaims in the preface to his book that the fea­ture he has aimed first to emphasize is: "the historical grounds for friendship between America and Eng­land, in spite of old sins and misunderstandings.

"Throughout I have not hesitated to portray the weaknesses, blun­ders, and sins of democracy."

He, in my opinion, herein pleads guilty to the charge of being an English propagandist.

Some of the un-American teachings running through this text­book are:

"Most of the settlers were `servants,' and a rather worthless lot" (p. 67).

They were "a bad lot, with the vices of an irresponsible, un­trained, hopeless class. *  *  * Cheats and drunkards from this class  *  *  * led to crime or suicide" (p. 72).

Democracy—"the meanest and worst form of government" (p. 80).

"Many of them paid themselves indirectly for their devotion to public service by what would today be called graft" (p. 132).

"Especially was the public land a source of private riches" (p. 133).

"Pettiness and ignorance on the part of the colonists" (p. 141).

"Wolfs had only 700 Americana, whom he described as `the dirtiest, most contemptible, cowardly dogs. *  *  * such rascals are an encumbrance to an army" (p. 182).

"Washington declared that he would have been wholly helpless for a long time, had he not had under his command a small troop of English soldiers" (p. 183).

"Colony after colony, for time after time, had been guilty of sacrificing the safety of a neighbor to sordid parsimony or to mean jealousy" (p. 189).

Those who took part in the Stamp Act protests, the Boston Tea Party, the Boston Massacre, and the capture of the Gaspee are referred to as mobs.

Some of the Colonial leaders are called patriots, but the word is derisively saddled with quotation marks.

The colonists who resisted British tyranny are repeatedly called radicals.

At Valley Forge, "nearly a fifth of a starving army deserted to the well-fed enemy in Philadelphia" (p. 236).

"The Tories, on the whole, represented respectability and refinement" (p. 230).

"It has been said that at important periods more Americans were under arms against independence than for it" (p. 237).

In referring to the early struggle of the Colonies for independ­ence, the book bristles with such sharply denunciatory phrases as "the most horrible form of mob violence," "corruptly managed sales;' "Congress and the Federal bunch," "scoundrels graduated into national politics," etc., etc.

_______________________

 

THORKELSON, Jacob (1876—1945)

THORKELSON, Jacob, a Representative from Montana; born in Egersund, Norway, September 24, 1876; attended elementary schools; immigrated to the United States in 1892 and studied navigation; engaged as a navigator in 1896 and served as master of ocean-going ships 1900-1907; served with the Virginia Naval Reserve 1897-1899; was graduated from the College of Physicians and Surgeons, University of Maryland, at Baltimore in 1911, and served as a member of the faculty 1911-1913; moved to Dillon, Beaverhead County, Mont., in 1913, to Warmsprings, Deer Lodge County, Mont., in 1915, and to Butte, Silver Bow County, Mont., in 1920, and practiced medicine and surgery; served in the United States Naval Reserve 1936-1939 with rank of lieutenant commander; elected as a Republican to the Seventy-sixth Congress (January 3, 1939-January 3, 1941); unsuccessful candidate for renomination in 1940; resumed the practice of medicine and surgery; unsuccessful candidate for the Republican nomination for United States Senator in 1942 and for Governor in 1944; died in Butte, Mont., November 20, 1945; interment in Holy Cross Cemetery. Source