history of the United States in which the truth about the participation
of the eleven states” be told.[218]

In the creation of a textbook board in 1907, Texas regarded it
essential that a uniform series of books be selected among which
there should be textbooks on the history of Texas, civil government
and United States history, in which “the construction placed on the
federal constitution by the Fathers of the Confederacy shall be fairly
presented.”[219]

A uniform series of textbooks not of a partisan character were
prescribed by laws in Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Kansas,
and included the subjects of United States history, state history,
and civil government.[220] Louisiana, Indiana, and Kansas added
ancient, medieval and modern history textbooks to others previously
prescribed.[221] In 1901 Nevada included the history of the United
States among the textbooks to be prescribed by the state board of
education,[222] and Idaho, in 1907, imposed the choice of a civil
government textbook and one in United States history upon her State
Board of Textbook Commissioners and the superintendent of public
instruction.[223] In 1913, California directed her state board of
education to revise the state series of textbooks which included United
States history.[224]

Three states, Ohio, New Mexico, and West Virginia placed laws upon
their statute books regarding state history, Ohio accepting Howe’s
_Historical Collections of Ohio_ as a reference book,[225] and New
Mexico limiting to one dollar a volume the price of a state history
which was to be prepared by a “known historian of the state.”[226]
Davies’ _Facts in Civil_ _Government_, by an act of 1901 of West
Virginia was again endorsed and the price fixed at 55 cents.[227]

Four states, during the period, in addition to three commonwealths
which named “partisan” textbooks, enacted laws to exclude histories
held to be sectional in spirit. Legislation in all other cases dealt
with provisions for a uniform series of textbooks. The statutes of
Louisiana, Indiana, and Kansas showed the expansion of the social
study curriculum in providing for textbooks in ancient, medieval and
modern history. Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and Kansas regulated the
purchase of textbooks in state and national history and in civics. In
California, Ohio, New Mexico and West Virginia provisions were made
relative to state history textbooks, and Idaho and Nevada in their laws
recognized a need for textbooks in civil government or United States
history.

FOOTNOTES:

[130] This period recognized the importance of vocational training as
an important function of the public school, and developed an interest
in other “expression subjects.” The content subjects were also expanded
and liberalized. According to Cubberley, “The modern school aims to
train pupils for greater social usefulness and to give them a more
intelligent grasp of the social and industrial, as well as the moral
and civic structure of our modern democratic life.” Cubberley, Ellwood
P., _Public Education in the United States_ (Boston, 1919), p. 370.

[131] Only the outstanding committee reports are mentioned. _Cf._
Johnson, _op. cit._ An N. E. A. committee report appeared in 1916 but
played no part in the social studies curriculum of the period. It
expressed, however, the practical and social viewpoint of the time.

[132] Eighteen states.

[133] See chapter VI for a discussion of the activities of the G. A.
R. in the North and of pro-Southern groups in the South to direct the
content of history textbooks.

[134] _Laws_ of Vermont, 1900, no. 25, p. 19. The law of 1912 was
substantially the same as that of 1900. _Laws_, 1912, sec. 1016, p. 68.

[135] _Laws_ of Vermont, 1902, no. 27, sec. 3, p. 39; _ibid._, 1904,
no. 137, sec. 4, p. 62; _Public Statutes_, 1906, ch. 47, sec. 1016, p.
277.

[136] _Public Statutes_ of Vermont, 1906, ch. 46, sec. 1003, p. 275.
_Cf._ _Laws_, 1888, ch. 5, sec. 95, p. 24.

[137] _Public Acts_ of Vermont, 1915, sec. 44, p. 131.

[138] _Supplement to the Public Statutes of New Hampshire_, 1901-1913,
p. 17 (1901, ch. 96, sec. 4, 1903, 31:1; 1903, 118:2; 1905, 19:1).

[139] _Supplement to the Public Statutes of New Hampshire_, 1901-1913,
ch. 92, sec. 6, p. 172. (_Laws_, 1903, 31:2; 1909, 49:1; 1911, 136:2.)

[140] _Public Acts_ of Connecticut, 1903, ch. 96, p. 65; _General
Statutes_, 1918, ch. 45, sec. 852, Vol. I, p. 312.

[141] _Laws_ of Delaware, 1911, p. 197; _Revised Statutes_, 1915, ch.
71, 2289, sec. 17, p. 1102; _ibid._, ch. 71, 2288, sec. 16, p. 1100.

[142] _Laws_ of Pennsylvania, 1911, sec. 1607, p. 394.

[143] _Kentucky Statutes_, 1909, ch. 113, par. 4421a (2), p. 1765; also
_Acts_, 1904, p. 11. This law was on the statute books in 1909; also
_Acts_, 1916, ch. 24, art. III, par. 24, p. 173. _Code_ of Virginia,
1904, ch. 66, sec. 1497, p. 810; _Acts_, 1906, par. 1497, p. 443.
_Public Laws_ of North Carolina, 1901, ch. 4, sec. 37; 1905, ch. 533,
s9; 1907, ch. 641, s853, 957; _Revised Code_, 1908, ch. 89, par. 4060,
Vol. II, p. 2049; _ibid._, 1913, par. 1383, Vol. I, p. 332.

[144] _Code_ of South Carolina, 1902, sec. 1201, Vol. I, p. 462;
_ibid._, 1912, sec. 1731, Vol. I, p. 480. _Cf._ page 16.

[145] _General Laws_ of Texas, 1905, sec. 100, p. 289; McEachon’s
_Annotated Civil Statutes_, 1913, art. 2783, Vol. II, p. 1114. The same
subjects are required through 1913.

[146] _Code_ of Alabama, 1907, 1685 (4), Vol. I, p. 741 See page 17 for
the same law in the Code of 1897.

[147] _Code_ of Georgia, 1910, ch. 4, art. 4, sec. 3, par. 1464, Vol.
I, p. 376. The law was passed in 1903.

[148] _Code_ of West Virginia, 1916, ch. 45, par. 78, p. 578;
substantially the same in _Acts_, 1872, ch. 123; 1881, ch. 15; 1887,
ch. 3; 1891, ch. 63; 1895, ch. 36; 1908, ch. 27; 1915, ch. 56.

[149] _Compiled Laws_ of Florida, 1914, 390, art. 4, Vol. I, p. 141;
_Laws_, 1905, ch. 5382, sec. 6, p. 34, also _Laws_, 1903, p. 180.

[150] _Laws_ of Florida, 1909, ch. 5938, p. 126 (No. 69).

[151] _Constitution and Revised Laws of Louisiana_, 1876 to 1902 (Act
214, 1902), sec. 23, p. 612; again _ibid._, 1908, p. 45; _Annotated
Revision_, 1915, 2532, sec. 16, Vol. I, p. 846. The law was unchanged
in the _Revisions_ of 1908 and of 1915.

[152] _Laws_ of Mississippi, 1916, ch. 187 (4540), p. 277.

[153] _General and Local Acts_ of Ohio, 1904, sec. 4007-1, p. 359.

[154] _Ibid._, 1910, p. 103.

[155] _Code_ of Ohio, 1910, sec. 7648, sec. 7649, p. 1622.

[156] _General and Local Acts_ of Ohio, 1911, sec. 7830, p. 130.
Repealed February 17, 1914. _Ibid._, 1914, p. 109.

[157] _Revised Statutes_ of Illinois, 1913, ch. 122, 509, p. 2267. In
force July 1, 1909. Again found, _Revised Statutes_, 1917, ch. 122,
509, p. 2736.

[158] _Statutes_ of Wisconsin, 1917, 40, 30, p. 375; _ibid._, 1915, ch.
27s. 447 (1863, c155 s55; 1866, c111 s6; 1869, c50 s1; 1871, c14 s1;
R. S. 1878, s447; _Suppl._, 1906, s447; 1907, c118, 200; 1911, c409).
_Statutes_ of Wisconsin, 1913, ch. 27 s553 p-5, p. 335; _ibid._, 1917,
s41.17 (1), p. 411. This law was repealed in 1917. The requirement was
the same in 1915. _Ibid._, 1915, c275, s553, p-5, p. 335. In Wisconsin,
in normal training courses in the high school, American history was
required for at least one semester in the eleventh and twelfth grades.

[159] _Revised Laws_ of Minnesota, 1915, ch. 14, 1340, p. 273. _General
Statutes_, 1913, 2299, p. 629; _General Laws_, 1895, ch. 17, sec. 2,
p. 138. This legislation had been preceded by legislation of 1895,
prescribing civil government for county schools.

[160] _Laws_ of Indiana, 1907, ch. 192, p. 324. Burns’ _Annotated
Statutes_, 1914, 6582 (5984), Vol. III, p. 384, and 6584, p. 385.

[161] _Ibid._

[162] _Compiled Laws_ of South Dakota, 1903, 2378, p. 432. The teaching
of civil government and United States history in the common schools.

[163] _Revised Code_ of North Dakota, 1913, par. 1383, Vol. I, p. 332.
The requirement included American history and civil government.

[164] _Laws_ of Kansas, 1903, ch. 435, p. 672. History of United
States and Kansas history. _Laws_, 1913, ch. 271, p. 454, added civil
government. _General Statutes_, 1915, ch. 105, art. 5, par. 8985, p.
1818, for district schools, history of the United States and of Kansas.

[165] _Revised Statutes_ of Nebraska, 1913, ch. 71, art. X, 6839, sec.
140, p. 1907.

[166] _Revised Statutes_ of Missouri, 1909, par. 10852, and _ibid._,
1919, par. 11218, and _ibid._, 1909, par. 10923, Vol. III, p. 3400
respectively. The last law is also in _Session Laws_, 1903, p. 264;
_ibid._, 1909, p. 770.

[167] _Laws_ of Oklahoma, 1905, p. 378; _Compiled Laws_, 1909, sec.
8233, p. 1664.

[168] _Revised Laws_ of Oklahoma, 1910, art. III, 7667, Vol. II, p.
2084; _Session Laws_, 1907-8, p. 14.

[169] _Session Laws_ of Oregon, 1911, ch. 58, sec. 59, p. 96.

[170] _Session Laws_ of Wyoming, 1913, Senate File No. 41, p. 45.

[171] _Ibid._, 1917, ch. 123, p. 215.

[172] _Statutes_ of California, 1903, par. 1874: 2, p. 195; _Codes and
Statutes_, 1905, par. 1874: 2, Vol. I, p. 451, _Statutes_, 1907, p. 70;
_Consolidated Supplement to Kerr’s Cyclopedia_, 1913, par. 1665, p.
194. _Cf._ page 20.

[173] _Revised Laws of the Territory of Arizona_, 1901, 2214 (sec.
85), p. 602. This is the same as _Laws_ of 1885, p. 157, also _Revised
Statutes_, 1887, 1553, sec. 81, p. 284.

[174] _Laws_ of New Mexico, 1911, ch. 41, p. 68. Approved June 8, 1912.
Also _Annotated Statutes_, 1915, par. 4958, sec. 152, Vol. II, p. 1429.

[175] _Codes_ of California, 1905, 1772, Vol. I, p. 426, grammar school
certificates; United States history and civil government were also
required for this certificate. _Compiled Statutes_ of Idaho, 1919, par.
986, Vol. I, p. 276; first grade certificate, with a choice of medieval
and modern history or English history added to American history and
civics required for other certificates. _Session Laws_, 1911, p. 448;
_ibid._, 1915, p. 333; repealed in session 1921, _Laws_, 1921, p.
473. _General Laws_ of Oregon, 1911, ch. 58, sec. 9, p. 89; for state
certificate, general history was required. _Revised Laws_ of Minnesota,
1905, ch. 14, 1354, p. 275, for professional certificates, ancient,
medieval, English, and American history. _General Laws_ of Wisconsin,
1919, ch. 601, first grade, modern history and United States history,
history of Wisconsin, rural economics. _Laws_ of Ohio, 1919, sec.
7831-2, p. 685, modern history, general history, economics, sociology,
civics, among sixteen branches from which five were to be chosen for
high school certificates. _Laws_ of Missouri, 1911, sec. 10939, p. 408,
first grade certificate, giving a choice of ancient, medieval or modern
or English history for examination. _Laws_ of Texas, 1921, ch. 129,
sec. 108a, p. 243, high school certificate civil government, ancient
and modern history, and for elementary certificate of second class,
United States history and Texas history.

[176] _Compiled Statutes of Idaho_, _op. cit._ _Statutes_ of Nevada,
1912, ch. 114, p. 156, also _Revised Laws_, 1912, sec. 3263, Vol. I, p.
947, general history, United States history, civil government, current
events for the first and second grade elementary certificates; sec.
3262, high school certificates; civil government, general history,
United States history, with a selection of English history out of a
group of subjects. _Laws_ of Kansas, 1915, ch. 298, sec. 14, p. 392,
first grade certificate, also in _Laws_, 1911, ch. 277, sec. 2, p.
506; _ibid._, 1913, ch. 268, p. 450. _Statutes_ of Wisconsin, 1913,
sec. 450-3, first grade certificate required English history, history
of United States, civil government, local and national; for the third
grade, the latter two were required.

[177] _Code_ of West Virginia, 1916, ch. 45, par. 87, elementary
certificates, _Laws_, 1919, p. 87. _Annotated Revision_ of Louisiana,
1915, 2572 (sec. 1, art. 55, 1906, Vol. I, p. 88), state teachers’
certificate. _Laws_ of Texas, 1905, sec. 118, p. 293, permanent
certificate and first grade. _Revised Statutes_ of Illinois, 1913, ch.
122, 541, third to first grade elementary certificate, also _ibid._,
1917, ch. 122, 541, _Laws_, 1919, p. 900. _Revised Laws_ of Minnesota,
1905, ch. 14, 1354, p. 275, professional state certificates. _Laws_ of
Nebraska, 1919, ch. 70, sec. 3, p. 262, professional state and high
school certificate; also _Revised Statutes_, 1913, ch. 71, art. XIII,
6859, sec. 158, professional state certificate (_Laws_, 1905, p. 559).
_Laws_ of South Dakota, 1919, p. 169, repeals provisions of _Revised
Code_, 1919, sec. 3; for a life diploma, general history, economics or
sociology; also general history, United States history, South Dakota
history and civil government in a state certificate; _Laws_ of 1905,
sec. 2286, p. 136, and _ibid._, 1911, p. 170. _Compiled Laws_ of Utah,
1907, par. 1767, pp. 684-685, and _ibid._, 1917, par. 4509, p. 914,
state professional certificates for grammar grades and high school.
_Statutes_ of Nevada, 1912, ch. 80, p. 157, first grade elementary
school certificate; ch. 114, sec. 24, high school certificates
(approved bill March 17, 1913); also _Statutes_, 1912, high school and
elementary school certificates; _General Laws_, 1914, sec. 7831, high
school certificate general history and a choice in elective history.
_Session Laws_ of Washington, 1909, sec. 4644, p. 516, first grade
elementary certificates and life certificates; _ibid._, 1911, ch. 16,
sec. 4, p. 51, life certificates. _Political Code_ of Idaho, 1901,
ch. XXXVI, sec. 1028, Vol. I, p. 311, first, second and third grade
certificates.

[178] _Supplement to the Code_ of Iowa, 1902, sec. 2736, p. 315.
_Acts_, 1906, ch. 122, sec. 4, p. 88, first grade certificate had been
found as early as 1882. _Laws_ of Nebraska, 1903, par. 5542, sec. 5;
in 1919, political economy is not mentioned. _Revised Statutes_ of
Wyoming, 1899, sec. 627, p. 228; also _Laws_, 1901, ch. 57, p. 60.

[179] _Compiled Laws_ of South Dakota, 1913, par. 13, Vol. I, p. 565,
for life certificates.

[180] _Statutes_ of Wisconsin, 1915, ch. 27s. 450-2, p. 272. _Digest
of Statutes_ of Arkansas, 1921, par. 9022, rural teachers’ certificate
(Act of March 28, 1917).

[181] _Compiled Laws_ of South Dakota, 1913, par. 55, Vol. I, p. 572;
_ibid._, 1911, p. 413; _Revised Statutes_, 1919, par. 7392, p. 1847,
for first grade certificate; also _Laws_, 1919, p. 170. _Laws_ of
Nevada, 1907, secs. 15, 16, 17, p. 383, “current news”; _Statutes_,
1921, ch. 208, sec. 25, elementary school certificate, first grade,
“current events.”

[182] _Statute Law_ of Pennsylvania, 1920, 5003, p. 462, professional
and provisional certificates. _Laws_ of Delaware, 1919, 2326-118, sec.
118, elementary school certificate; _ibid._, 1920, sec. 170, p. 190.
_Code_ of West Virginia, 1916 (all statutes in force), ch. 45, par. 87,
p. 580, for elementary and first three grades of certificates; again in
_Laws_, 1919, p. 87, _ibid._, 1921, sec. 104, elementary certificate.
_Statutes_ of Kentucky, 1918, ch. 113, art. XI, par. 4501, p. 941,
for all certificates. _Laws_ of Mississippi, 1916, ch. 188, 4543, p.
278, first and second grade licenses; also state licenses, _Laws_,
1908, p. 209. _Code_ of Alabama, 1907, 1734, Vol. I, p. 757, the first
three grades of certificates. _Revised Laws_ of Oklahoma, 1910, 7923,
Vol. II, p. 2153, the first three grades of licenses. McEachin’s
_Civil Statutes_ of Texas, 1913, articles 2799-2802, Vol. II, p. 1117,
permanent certificates (also Sayles’ _Civil Statutes_, art. 3974, pp.
1419-20) and first, second, third grade certificates, and _Laws_,
1905, sec. 118, p. 293; _ibid._, 1921, p. 243. _Laws_ of Wisconsin,
1919, ch. 601, 39.18 (1), 39.19 (1), and 39.20 (1), for first, second,
and third grade certificates. _Laws_ of South Dakota, 1919, p. 169,
_Compiled Laws_ of South Dakota, 1913, secs. 13 and 14, Vol. I, p.
565, life diploma, state, first, second, third grade certificates, and
primary. _Revised Statutes_ of Illinois, 1913, ch. 122, p. 2271, county
certificates; _ibid._, 1917, ch. 122; _Laws_, 1919, p. 900, as well as
_Laws_ of 1903 and 1905. _Laws_ of Kansas, 1915, ch. 298, p. 392, for
the first, second and third grade certificates; _ibid._, 1913, ch. 268,
p. 450; _ibid._, 1911, ch. 277, p. 506. _Statutes_ of New Mexico, 1915,
par. 4957, Vol. II, p. 1429, first and second grade certificates.

[183] Arizona prescribed for first and second grade certificates,
civics and “history,” which probably meant American history. See
_Revised Laws_, 1901, 2142 (sec. 13), p. 584.

[184] In Florida, for example, June 3 was made a holiday to “perpetuate
in the minds of the people the purity of life, the intellectual
ability, the heroic fortitude, and the patriotic character of Jefferson
Davis.” _Laws_ of Florida, 1891, ch. 4058, p. 99.

[185] See _American History and Patriotic Program for all Schools of
Oklahoma_, issued by the State Department of Education, 1921, p. 7.

[186] _Laws_ of New York, 1898, secs. 1, 2, 3, Vol. III, p. 1191;
_Revised Laws_ of Massachusetts, 1902, ch. 42, sec. 50, Vol. I, p. 474;
_Laws_ of Indiana, 1907, ch. 253, p. 537; _Acts_ of Iowa, 1913, ch.
245, sec. 2, p. 264; _Laws_ of Arizona, 1903, no. 19, p. 25.

[187] Burns’ _Annotated Statutes_ of Indiana, 1914, 5852a, Vol. III, p.
385.

[188] _Laws_ of Kansas, 1907, ch. 319, p. 493. The Iowa law, 1913, is
much like this law. See _Acts_ of Iowa, 1913, p. 264. The Grand Army
of the Republic and the Woman’s Relief Corps were actively engaged in
supplying schools with flags for the purpose of inculcating patriotism
throughout this period.

[189] _Acts_ of New Jersey, 1915, p. 904.

[190] _Revised Statutes_ of Maine, 1916, ch. 16, sec. 52; _Laws_, 1907,
ch. 182, p. 199; _ibid._, 1915, ch. 176.

[191] No attempt is made to treat legal holidays where the law requires
observance by simply specifying the dates of such days. They are
discussed only when the enactments indicate patriotic exercises to
be held within the public schools, or where the purpose of teaching
history through the observance of such days is stated.

[192] _Laws_ of Kansas, 1886, ch. CXXV, p. 167. Approved February 18,
1886. Especially active in their desire for a proper observance of
Memorial Day were the G. A. R., who in annual encampments frequently
expressed a faith in it as a means for promoting patriotism as well as
for memorializing the deeds of their comrades.

[193] _Statutes_ of Vermont, 1894, no. 25, par. 685, p. 21; _Public
Statutes_, 1906, ch. 46, sec. 1005, p. 275; _General Laws_, 1917, ch.
57, sec. 1240.

[194] _Acts and Resolves_ of Massachusetts, 1890, ch. III, sec. 1,
p. 94; _Laws_ of New Hampshire, 1897, ch. 14, p. 16; also _Laws_,
1921, ch. 85, sec. 23, p. 127. The latter date in New Hampshire might
indicate a reënactment. South Dakota, in 1921, specially designated
Memorial Day as “Citizenship Day.” See page 98.

[195] _Laws_ of New York, 1898, ch. 481, Vol. II, p. 1191. _Laws_ of
Arizona, 1903, no. 19, p. 25. _Laws_ of Kansas, 1907, ch. 319, p. 493.

[196] _Laws_ of New York, _op. cit._ _Laws_ of Arizona, _op. cit._
_Laws_ of Kansas, _op. cit._

[197] _Statutes_ of California, 1909, ch. 527, p. 861, approved April
13, 1909. _Acts and Resolves_ of Maine, 1909, ch. 190, sec. 1, p. 190.
_Acts_ of New Mexico, 1909, ch. 121, sec. 7, p. 342. _Acts_ of West
Virginia, 1911, ch. 40, p. 117. Also in West Virginia _Code_, 1916, ch.
15, par. 1, p. 246. _General Laws_ of Vermont, 1917, ch. 57, sec. 1241,
p. 295.

[198] _Acts and Resolves_ of Rhode Island, 1914, ch. 1071, sec. 2, p.
110; also _Acts_, 1901, ch. 818, p. 55.

[199] This law was passed in 1911. _Compiled Laws_ of Michigan, 1915,
ch. 108 (5823), sec. 1, Vol. II, p. 2198. Non-compliance might cause
the revocation of the teacher’s certificate by the county commissioner
of schools or by the superintendent of public instruction.

[200] _Laws_ of Maryland, 1904, sec. 47, p. 991. _Acts and Resolves_ of
Maine, 1913, ch. 195, sec. 88, p. 240.

[201] _Ibid._

[202] _Compiled Laws_ of Michigan, 1915, _op. cit._ _General Laws_
of Oregon, 1921, ch. 41, p. 62. This law, although coming in 1921,
possesses the characteristics of those of the earlier period. See page
93. _Annotated Revision of Statutes of Louisiana_, 1915, 2659, 2660,
secs. 1, 2, Vol. I, p. 893. (Act 56, 1919, p. 92.) West Virginia in
1911, also, set aside October 12 for celebration in the common and
graded schools. _Laws_, 1911, ch. 40, p. 117.

[203] _Laws_ of New York, _op. cit._ _Laws_ of Arizona, _op. cit._
_Laws_ of Kansas, _op. cit._

[204] _Public Acts_ of Connecticut, 1905, ch. 146, p. 355. Approved
June 16, 1905. This amended 2140 of the _General Statutes_.

[205] Proclamation of the Governor of New Jersey (E. C. Stokes).
_Laws_, 1906, p. 787.

[206] _Acts and Resolves_ of Massachusetts, 1897, p.628. This bill
passed the Senate February 3, 1897, and the House on February 8, 1897.

[207] _General Laws_ of Rhode Island, 1909, title X, ch. 64, sec. 8, p.
267.

[208] _Code_ of South Carolina, 1912, par. 1810, Vol. I, p. 496.
_Laws_, 1906, XXIII, 22; approved February 17, 1906.

[209] _Code_ of Georgia, 1910, art. 7, par. 1528, Vol. I, p. 395. See
page 96 for North Carolina’s law setting aside October twelfth for
commemoration. The next chapter continues the discussion for laws
passed after 1917.

[210] _Digest_ of Arkansas Statutes, 1916, sec. 9654, p. 2166.

[211] _Laws_ of Maryland, 1904, sec. 47, p. 991.

[212] _Laws_ of Minnesota, 1911, ch. 81, sec. 1, p. 97. The day known
as Minnesota Day was designated by the superintendent of public
instruction by proclamation, the governor concurring.

[213] _Laws_ of Montana, 1913, ch. XIV, 1400, p. 263. In this year the
first Monday in November was named. A previous law, 1903, provided for
an observance on the last Friday in May. (_Laws_, 1903, ch. LXXXVIII,
p. 161.)

[214] _Laws_ of Missouri, 1915, p. 301.

[215] _Laws_ of Illinois, 1919, Sen. Bill, no. 238, p. 894. In a
case such as this the law has been discussed here rather than in the
following chapter. The chronological limits of the chapters have not
always been strictly adhered to.

[216] Approved March 11, 1904. The law also prohibited “partisan”
books. _Laws_ of Mississippi, 1904, ch. 86 (S. B. no. 51), p. 116.
Also _Code_, 1906, ch. 125, 4595, p. 1246. _Cf._ chapter VI for the
activities of pro-Southern groups in this period.

[217] Ratified March 4, 1905, _Laws_ of North Carolina, 1905, ch. 707,
p. 863.

[218] _Laws_ of Florida, 1915, ch. 6939 (no. 133), Vol. I, p. 311.
Approved June 3, 1915. The appropriation was not available until each
of eleven ex-Confederate states, or a majority of them, did likewise.
The governor of Florida was appointed to communicate with other
Southern governors about carrying out the act.

[219] _Laws_ of Texas, 1907, ch. IX, p. 449. Approved May 14, 1907. The
law of 1911 added general history to the list of books. _Laws_, 1911,
ch. 11, sec. 4, p. 90.

[220] _Code_ of Georgia, 1910, art. 1, sec. 2, par. 1439, Vol. I, p.
367. Also _Laws_, 1903, sec. 2, p. 54. _Laws_ of Alabama, 1903, sec. 1,
p. 167. _Code_ of Mississippi, 1906, ch. 125, 4595, p. 1246. _Laws_ of
Kansas, 1915, ch. 297, p. 383.

[221] _Annotated Revision of the Statutes_ of Louisiana, 1915, 2519,
Vol. I, p. 841 (sec. 3, act 214, 1912, p. 465). The books were to
remain unchanged for a period of six years. _Laws_ of Indiana, 1913,
ch. 58, p. 115. _Laws_ of Kansas, 1915, ch. 297, p. 383. In Indiana,
the price of the history of the United States to be used in the common
schools, could not exceed 65 cents. Burns’ _Annotated Statutes_ of
Indiana, 1914, 6338 (5867), Vol. III, p. 253.

[222] _Laws_ of Nevada, 1901, p. 50. Approved March 8, 1901.

[223] _Revised Code_ of Idaho, 1908, sec. 574, Vol. I, p. 370; _Laws_
of 1907, sec. 3, p. 477. (Sen. Bill no. 84. Approved March 14, 1907.)
There was also found on the statute books Idaho’s previous stipulation
prohibiting political documents in the schools. _Compiled Statutes_,
1919, Vol. I, p. 297.

[224] _General Laws_ of California, 1913, ch. 482, art. 4542, p. 1713.

[225] _Laws_ of Ohio, 1892, p. 241; also _Code_, 1910, sec. 7719, p.
1635.

[226] _Statutes_ of New Mexico, 1915, par. 4959, sec. 153, Vol. II, p.
1429. Act of June 8, 1912. Legislation in West Virginia, Oklahoma, and
Wisconsin included the stereotyped restriction regarding “matter of a
partisan character.” See _Laws_ of West Virginia, 1909, ch. 23, sec.
4, p. 346; _General Statutes_ of Oklahoma, 1908, sec. 6324, p. 1313,
_Laws_ of 1907, ch. 77, p. 681; _Statutes_ of Wisconsin, 1913, ch. 27,
sec. 553m-12, p. 319, _ibid._, 1915, ch. 27 s 553m-12, p. 330.

[227] _Code_ of West Virginia, 1916, ch. 45, par. 165a, p. 599 (Acts
of 1901, ch. 141).

                              CHAPTER IV

       THE EFFECT OF THE WORLD WAR ON LAWS FOR TEACHING HISTORY

THE CURRICULUM

When the Fathers of New England adopted the famous laws of 1642 and
1647, they acted on the belief that by the school the character of the
nation can be moulded. Throughout nearly three centuries of development
the confidence of the American people in the regenerating power of the
public school has grown. They have come to hold high faith in education
as an effective tool for the conservation and promotion of national
well-being. In each epoch, the school has attempted to accommodate its
offerings to the demands of the time, thereby reflecting the needs of a
people whose point of view is constantly changing. First conceived as
a force in the religious life of the people, the school soon became an
instrument for the development of “morality, virtue and good behavior.”
The latter eighteenth century captured the vision of a people fired
with patriotism and service to the state, and then by a citizenry
trained to “preserve and perfect a republican constitution.” The
occasion of a diverse and scattered electorate caused by the democratic
awakening of the Jacksonian era compelled acceptance of the theory
that it was a duty of the state to provide education for all. After
the Civil War, a renewed faith in nationality and a realization of the
economic and social demands of the time left their imprint upon the
public school curriculum.

The opening of the twentieth century witnessed the expansion of the
“citizenship aim” to include training for efficient participation in
a complex social and industrial life. Since then, many traditional
subjects of the previous period have been superseded by those tending
to give point to the new aims in education; and of the traditional
subjects retained many have been refashioned to fit a new and
present-day point of view.

This wider horizon has tended to encourage to a greater degree than
hitherto the introduction of many social studies, including economics,
sociology and foreign history. Although encumbered with survivals, the
history curriculum of the twentieth century has sought independence of
purely political and military events and has striven for a scientific
presentation of historical truths which should fit for “complete
living.” This new viewpoint was well exemplified in the report of
a committee of the National Education Association in 1916, which
proposed a six year course in the social studies from the seventh to
the twelfth grades, stressing the teaching of practical and present-day
problems.[228]

Shortly thereafter the United States entered the World War. America
at once faced not only the necessity of mobilizing the economic and
military resources of a country unprepared for war, but also that
still more difficult problem--the consolidation of public opinion.
Various agencies were created for the express purpose of coördinating
the spiritual resources of the country. Such was the design of the
Committee on Public Information. Speakers and writers gave freely of
their talents, and “hyphenism” and pacifism were driven to cover. The
Espionage Law betrayed the apprehension of the federal government
regarding unbridled speech and writing, and sedition laws in different
commonwealths served to arrest an open opposition to the War.

Following the War the fear of radicalism and disloyalty to the
established institutions of the country continued to express itself
in drastic legislation. In the public schools, the desire to develop
an unalloyed patriotism proved the motive for the passage of statutes
to promote a dynamic loyalty. In general, these laws relate to
the teaching of patriotism through instruction in the history and
government of the United States, open affirmations of loyalty by the
teaching personnel, the exclusion of alien teachers from the public
schools, flag legislation and observance days, enactments regarding
textbooks, and the Americanization of foreigners. Practically all
legislation since 1917 dealing with the curriculum contains provisions
pertaining to the social studies, and the greater amount reflects the
wartime glow of patriotic enthusiasm.[229]

In 1917 three states passed regulatory provisions respecting the
curriculum. Vermont’s legislation dealt with four-year high schools
and required the teaching of the political and social sciences.[230]
On February 17, Montana approved a law which called for instruction in
United States history, the history of Montana, and state and federal
civics among other required subjects for the elementary school, and
three days later Arkansas approved a similar law.[231] New Hampshire,
Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Kentucky and Texas continued laws enacted at
a previous time,[232] and Delaware, through legislation in 1919 gained
the unique distinction of prescribing “community civics” besides the
history of the nation and of the state.[233] Alabama and Georgia under
laws designed primarily to prescribe a uniform series of textbooks
included in the list of studies for which textbooks were mentioned, the
history of the state embracing the constitution of the state, and the
history of the United States with the constitution.[234] In Tennessee,
to the requirement of United States history for the elementary schools,
was added in 1917 the study of the federal constitution in the
secondary school curriculum.[235] Texas placed distinct emphasis upon
the teaching of state history through a regulation insisting that this
“history be taught in the history course in all public schools” and
“in this course only.”[236] The popularity of civil government, state
history, and United States history is further proved by South Dakota’s
prescription in 1919.[237]

Laws for dynamic patriotism were initiated by a statute of California
in 1917. One of the mildest of the laws of this type, its chief
purpose was training in the duties of citizenship through the study of
United States history, with special reference to the history of the
Constitution and the reasons for the adoption of each constitutional
provision. Instruction in local civil government was provided for as
well, with a specific statement regarding instruction in the duties of
citizenship.[238]

In 1918, South Dakota, Texas and New York placed upon their statute
books laws that were likewise a direct outgrowth of the war spirit. In
the first two states, patriotism, the laws declared, should spring from
lessons of “intelligent patriotism” inculcated by special exercises.
The South Dakota law specified an hour a week in the aggregate, to be
devoted in both public and private institutions “to the teaching of
patriotism, the singing of patriotic songs, the reading of patriotic
addresses and a study of the lives and history of American patriots.”
Should an instructor, school officer or superintendent fail to enforce
obedience to the law the statute provided for a fine of not less than
five dollars nor more than one hundred dollars, or imprisonment in
the county jail from five to thirty days, or both. In the case of the
malfeasance of a teacher, the superintendent of public instruction had
the power to revoke his certificate.[239]

In Texas, the law declared that “the daily program of every public
school should be so formulated that it includes at least ten minutes
for the teaching of lessons of intelligent patriotism, including the
needs of the State and Federal Governments, the duty of the citizens to
the State, and the obligation of the State to the citizen.”[240] The
statute concluded with this statement: “The fact that this nation is
now at war with a foreign foe, and that the strength of a government
of the people, by the people, and for the people must necessarily come
of its citizenship, creates an emergency and an imperative public
necessity that the constitutional rule requiring bills to be read on
three several days be suspended and that this act shall be in force
from and after its passage, and it is so enacted.”[241]

New York’s statute, known as the Lusk Law, is the most conspicuous
of all of the laws of this period because of its drastic character
and its later applications. This law became effective September 1,
1918. The phase of the law relating to instruction had two parts: one
prescribing courses of instruction in patriotism and citizenship, the
other specifying rules for inspection, supervision, and enforcement of
the law.

“In order to promote a spirit of patriotic and civic service and
obligation and to foster in the children of the state moral and
intellectual qualities which are essential in preparing to meet the
obligations of citizenship in peace or in war,” the law declared, “the
regents of the university of the state of New York shall prescribe
courses of instruction in patriotism and citizenship to be maintained
and followed in the schools of the state. The boards of education
and trustees of the several cities and school districts of the state
shall require instruction to be given in such courses, by the teachers
employed in the schools therein. All pupils attending such schools,
over the age of eight years, shall attend upon such instruction.”

The statute further prescribed similar courses of instruction for
private schools, and was required of all pupils over eight years of
age. In case such courses were not maintained in the private school,
attendance upon instruction in such school was not deemed equivalent to
instruction given to pupils of like age in the public schools.

The law empowered the regents of the University of the State of New
York to determine the subjects to be included in courses in patriotism
and citizenship, and to arrange such other matters as were required
for carrying into effect the objects and purposes of the law. The
commissioner of education was made responsible for its enforcement, and
to him fell the supervision and inspection of instruction. He was given
authority at his discretion to withhold, from a school district or
city, school money, if the authorities neglected such courses or failed
to compel attendance upon such instruction.[242]

In 1918, Massachusetts subscribed to training in the duties of
citizenship, including United States history, civil government, and
thrift in her public schools; and two years later, in a statute
relating to all elementary and secondary schools, she prescribed
“courses in American history and civics for the purpose of promoting
civic service and a greater knowledge of American history and of
fitting the pupils, morally and intellectually, for the duties of
citizenship.”[243]

In 1919, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Iowa, Kansas and Washington
passed laws of like character. Although each embodies certain
distinctive features, yet all assert a belief in the study of American
history and government as a preparation for a patriotic citizenship.

The New Jersey law contains concrete requirements. In each high school,
courses of study in “Community Civics” and in “Problems in American
Democracy” were prescribed through the agency of the Commissioner of
Education, with the approval of the State Board of Education. The law
required that “Community Civics” be completed not later than the end of
the second year, and the course in “Problems of American Democracy” be
commenced not later than the beginning of the third year. Sixty full
periods of not less than forty minutes each were specified for the
teaching of these subjects. For the elementary grades, the geography,
history and civics of New Jersey were prescribed. These courses of
study, the law provided, “shall be given together with instruction as
to the privileges and responsibilities of citizenship as they relate to
community and national welfare with the object of producing the highest
type of patriotic citizenship.”[244]

In Pennsylvania, too, it has become a duty of the state superintendent
of public instruction to prescribe “a course of study conducive to the
spirit of loyalty and devotion to the state and national governments,”
and for all elementary public schools instruction in the history of
the state and nation, including the elements of civil government.[245]
For the seventh and eighth grades Ohio prescribed civil government
and United States history; and Iowa, as a prerequisite to graduation
from any high school, required a course in United States history and
civil government for one year, as well as the offering of a semester of
social problems and economics in a four-year high school. In Kansas,
where the course in civil government and United States history was
designed for the elementary grades, provision was made, in the case
of noncompliance with the law, for the closing of the school by the
action of the county attorney or the attorney-general. It was in a like
spirit with other commonwealths that Washington declared the “study
of American history and American government” to be “indispensable to
good citizenship and an accurate appreciation of national ideals.”[246]
A similar provision, with the aim of promoting “Americanism” and in
training in the “ideals and principles underlying the government of
the United States,” met defeat in Maryland in 1920 by the veto of the
governor.[247]

The year 1921 was particularly prolific in legislation of a wartime
character. A variety of expression but a unity of purpose continued to
be in evidence. Laws were enacted in Maine, New Hampshire, Wisconsin,
Michigan, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Colorado, Utah, Arizona,
Nevada, New Mexico, and California.

The Maine statute prescribed the teaching of American history and civil
government in all elementary and high school grades, both private and
public, and made these subjects a requirement for graduation from
all grammar schools.[248] The law of her neighbor, New Hampshire,
required the reading of the constitution of the United States and of
New Hampshire “at least once a year in the last grade below the high
school.”[249]

In line with the other states Michigan declared, by a statute of
May 17, 1921, that the study of the state and federal constitutions
should begin not later than the eighth grade and continue throughout
the high school course to an extent to be decided upon by the state
superintendent of public instruction.[250] In Wisconsin, provision was
made for instruction in the history and civil government of the United
States and of Wisconsin, and in citizenship,[251] and Illinois, on
June 21, 1921, passed “An Act to make the teaching of representative
government in the public schools and other educational institutions in
the State of Illinois compulsory.”[252] This law endorsed the teaching
of patriotism through a knowledge of “the principles of representative
government, as enumerated in the Declaration of Independence and the
Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State
of Illinois,” and was required in all schools maintained in whole or
in part by state funds. The law provided, also, for one hour of such
instruction each week in the seventh and eighth grades, with an equal
amount of time in the high school.

On March 31, 1921, Iowa added to her requirements a provision that all
public and private schools should give regular courses of instruction
in the constitution of the state and nation, beginning not later
than the eighth grade and continuing in the high school to an extent
to be determined by the superintendent of public instruction. A
Nebraska statute of that year established for all schools courses in
American history and civil government to give “a thorough knowledge
of the history of our country and its institutions and of our form of
government.”[253]

In Oklahoma, instruction in American history must commence in the
primary grades of all schools, both public and private, beginning
with the lowest and continuing through all primary years, with the
privilege of substituting state history in one of the grades. For this
instruction, there should be allotted at least one hour each week. It
was specifically stated that the purpose of the statute was to instil
in the hearts of the pupils “an understanding of the United States
and of a love of country and devotion to the principles of American
government,” and that “such instruction ... shall avoid, as far as
possible, being a mere recital of dates and events.” For the high
school, at least one full year’s work in American history and civics
was required, and no college, normal school, university or chartered
institution of learning in the state was allowed to confer a degree
until a student had passed a course in American history and civil
government.[254]

The social study requirement of Colorado for her public schools
consisted of the history and civil government of the state,[255] and
Arizona in her law specified that not less than two years’ instruction
in civics, economics, and American political history and government
be provided for all common schools, high schools, normal schools and
universities.[256] Nevada, in her enactment of February 24, compelled
all schools including colleges, save exclusively scientific schools,
to teach American history, history of the state, and American civil
government.[257] Included as a part of this law was a provision for
patriotic exercises for at least an hour in each school week. New
Mexico, declaring that the passage of a law prescribing the teaching of
national and state history and government was “necessary for the public
peace and safety,” made the statute effective immediately,[258] and
California again essayed an endorsement of the history of the state and
nation with emphasis upon the adoption of the Constitution.[259]

In 1922 the commonwealth of Virginia enacted a law similar to those
passed the previous year in fourteen other states. By this statute,
pupils enrolled in the public free schools are taught civil government,
history of the United States and the history of Virginia. The 1922
session of the Rhode Island legislature adopted much the same kind of a
provision for all public and private schools by making obligatory the
teaching of the principles of popular and representative government and
the history of Rhode Island.[260]

An adherence to the early method of endorsing the teaching of
patriotism characterized enactments in Idaho, Nevada, and Utah. In
the last state, instruction “tending to impress upon the minds of the
pupils the importance and necessity of good manners, truthfulness,
temperance, purity, patriotism, and industry,” was prescribed in
connection with the regular school work.[261] Nevada, four years
before the passage of Utah’s law, provided for civic training in her
high schools, whose purpose was to “inculcate a love of country and
a disposition to serve the country effectively and loyally,” both in
times of peace and of war.[262]

Idaho, through the office of the teacher, continued the practice of
prescribing the teaching of patriotism as a duty of the teacher through
that intangible method of impressing upon the minds of the pupils
“the principles of truth, justice, morality, and patriotism.”[263]
Wisconsin, also, sanctioned moral instruction through training by the
teacher.[264]

Since 1923, nineteen states have passed laws affecting the social study
curriculum. In general, their purpose is to instil “into the hearts
of the various pupils ... an understanding of the United States, ... a
love of country, and ... a devotion to the principles of the American
Government.”[265]

Through statutes passed in 1923, Arkansas, Mississippi, Ohio, Tennessee
and West Virginia require the teaching of United States history and the
Constitution; and Kansas adopted the same requirement in 1925.[266]
Instruction in the federal constitution is prescribed in Alabama,
Idaho, New Jersey, Oregon and Utah by enactments in 1923, and in New
York by a law of 1924. Statutes in Delaware and North Carolina[267]
require the study of the constitutions of the nation and the state, and
Texas adds to that regulation a recommendation that special emphasis
be placed on “the guarantees contained in the Bill of Rights.”[268]
The Minnesota law prescribes for all schools “regular courses in
the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United
States, to an extent to be determined by the State Commissioner
of Education.”[269] In New Mexico a similar enactment requires an
understanding of the Declaration of Independence, as well as a
knowledge of state and national history and government.[270]

For her schools California establishes “regular courses of instruction
in the constitution of the United States, including the study of
American institutions and ideals,” and Georgia adopts a similar
requirement adding the study of state government. In both states it
is provided that no pupil shall receive a certificate of graduation
who has not passed satisfactorily examinations in the required
subjects.[271]

Substantially all these enactments provide that instruction in the
required subjects shall begin in the elementary grades, continue in
the high school and in courses in state colleges, universities and
educational departments of state and municipal institutions to an
extent to be determined by the superintendent of public instruction or
by the state board of education.[272]

Endorsement of the study of the Constitution was given by Congress in
March, 1925, when the Senate passed a House resolution expressing “the
earnest hope and desire that every educational institution, whether
public or private, will provide and maintain as a part of the required
curriculum, a course for the study of the Constitution of the United
States....”

The many laws enacted during the years following the World War are
indicative of the high value placed upon the social studies as an
essential part of education. Besides laws requiring the teaching of
these subjects purely for their content, many enactments express a high
faith that the social studies will serve to inculcate patriotism and
to train for citizenship. Forty-three commonwealths have engaged in
legislation of this character since 1917, and all states have at some
time endorsed history as a required subject in the public schools.[273]

OATHS OF ALLEGIANCE AND CITIZENSHIP FOR TEACHERS

Few laws requiring American citizenship and oaths of allegiance, in
the case of teachers, appeared on the statute books prior to 1914. The
World War precipitated the movement for enactments which insist upon an
openly avowed loyalty, as well as upon a teaching personnel consisting
of citizens only.[274]

In 1915, three states enacted anti-alien laws for teaching. A Michigan
statute required a teacher, if twenty-one years of age, to be a
citizen of the United States.[275] Nevada directed the superintendent
of public instruction, the regents of the state university and school
trustees to dismiss “any teacher, ..., professor or president employed
by the educational department of this state who is not a citizen of
the United States; or who has not declared his or her intention to
become a citizen.” The law forbade any state controller or county
auditor to issue salary warrants to the persons mentioned, in case of
non-citizenship.[276]

In California a law of 1915 prescribed that “no person except a
native-born or naturalized citizen of the United States, should be
employed in any department of the state, county, city and county
or city-government of this state.” An exception, however, was made
in favor of teachers who had declared their intention to become
naturalized and of any native-born wife of a foreigner.[277]

In 1917, the one hundred and fortieth session of the New York
legislature gave its assent to a bill which has become known as
one of the Lusk laws. This law reflects precisely the same sort of
apprehension which moved some of the legislators of the Civil War
period. It became the precursor of three others of a like nature, one
in 1918, one in 1919, and one in 1921. The law of 1917 related to
treasonable or seditious utterances by teachers, the second and third
to the granting of teachers’ licenses to citizens only, and the fourth
to the employment of teachers who have criticized the government of the
United States.

The law of 1917 relating to freedom of speech prescribed that “a
person employed as superintendent of schools, teacher or employee in
the public schools, ... shall be removed from such position for the
utterance of any treasonable or seditious act, or acts, while holding
such position.”[278] The laws of 1918 and 1919 made citizenship an
essential qualification for becoming a teacher. Any person employed as
a teacher on April 4, 1918, however, who was not naturalized, was given
permission to remain in his position provided he, within a year, should
make application for citizenship. The law of 1919 exempted from the
foregoing requirement teachers who were citizens of the Allied Powers
in the World War, and who had been employed as teachers in the New York
schools on or prior to April 4, 1918, provided that “such teacher make
application to become a citizen before the first day of September,
1920, and within the time thereafter prescribed by law shall become
such citizen.”[279]

The third link in the chain of constraint was an enactment which
declared that an applicant, even though a citizen, must be “a person
of good moral character” and must be “loyal and obedient to the
government of this state and of the United States,” in order to obtain
a license to teach. For “no such certificate shall be issued to any
person who, while a citizen of the United States, has advocated either
by word of mouth or in writing, a change in the form of government
of the United States or of this state, by force, violence or any
unlawful means.” The statute provided that the discovery that a
teacher were guilty of any of the prohibitions mentioned, made him
liable to a revocation of his certificate through the commissioner of
education.[280] The sum of $15,000 was appropriated to carry the act
into effect.[281]

Much discussion and agitation attended the Lusk laws after their
passage and in the attempts at their enforcement, for many believed
that the right of free speech was endangered by such measures. In 1923,
under considerable pressure, the legislature revoked the statute, and
Governor Alfred E. Smith affixed his signature to the repeal.

Laws similar to the statutes passed by New York are found in Ohio,
Michigan, West Virginia, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Nebraska, South Dakota,
Nevada, Idaho, Montana, and Washington. In 1919, Michigan, Nebraska,
Tennessee, Montana, and Washington enacted statutes requiring that all
teachers of the public schools must be citizens of the United States,
and Idaho retained upon her statute books a law of 1897 which had
the same intent. The same action was taken by North Dakota in 1921.
In addition to those engaged as instructors in the public schools,
Nebraska included teachers in private and parochial institutions.
In Washington, California and Michigan the privilege of a license
was granted to those aliens who declared their intention of becoming
citizens, and in Washington, there were added to the proscribed
group, those teachers whose certificates or diplomas had been revoked
on account of a failure to impress upon the minds of the pupils “the
principles of patriotism or to train them up to a true comprehension of
the rights, duty, and dignity of American citizenship.”[282]

An open declaration of loyalty and of an intention to inculcate
patriotism in their pupils was required of all teachers by Ohio in
a law of 1919, by Colorado, Nevada, Oklahoma, Oregon, and South
Dakota in 1921. Ohio, Colorado, Oklahoma, Arizona, and South Dakota
made it incumbent upon teachers not only in the public schools, but
in private and parochial schools, to take an oath to support the
constitution of the state and of the United States and to obey their
laws. Ohio insisted upon an “undivided allegiance to the government of
one country, the United States of America,” and Colorado and Oregon
sanctioned the same form.[283] Nevada required of teachers the oath in
her constitution, prescribed for all public officers.[284] In Oklahoma,
any teacher violating the law, or any person or officer paying out any
school funds to a person teaching without subscribing to the oath,
was deemed guilty of a misdemeanor. Upon conviction such a person was
penalized by a fine of not less than one hundred or more than five
hundred dollars, or imprisonment in the county jail from sixty days to
six months, or both.[285] Oregon, upon conviction, prescribed a maximum
fine of one hundred dollars for non-enforcement of the law.

In West Virginia, a law of 1923 has enjoined upon all teachers, at the
time of signing a yearly contract, an oath to support the constitution
of the United States and West Virginia.[286]

In addition to the regulations imposing an oath of allegiance on
teachers, South Dakota, like Washington, in her law included a
prohibition of treasonable utterances. “Any teacher,” the law declared,
“who shall have publicly reviled, ridiculed or otherwise spoken or
acted with disrespect and contumacy towards the flag of the United
States or its official uniforms or insignia, or towards the system of
government of the United States, and its Constitution, or shall refuse
to take and subscribe to the oath of allegiance hereinbefore required,
shall thereafter forever be disqualified to teach in any public or
private school within this state, and the certificate of any such
teacher shall be revoked by the superintendent of public instruction
upon satisfactory proof of the commission of any such offense.”[287]

An Oklahoma statute has excluded from all public and private schools
of that state persons “guilty of teaching or inculcating disloyalty
to the United States or of publicly reviling the flag, or the system
of government of the United States.” Yet the statute prescribed that
“criticism of any public official shall not be construed as within the
purview” of this regulation. California, in a bill relating to American
histories and other textbooks which passed the Assembly in 1923, would
have leashed her teachers in much the same way. But the bill failed of
passage in the Senate.[288]

The appropriation bill passed by the Sixty-Eighth Congress for the
District of Columbia, in 1925, provided that no money should be
available “for the payment of the salary of any superintendent,
assistant superintendent, director of intermediate instruction, or
supervising principal who permits the teaching of partisan politics,
disrespect for the Holy Bible or that ours is an inferior form of
government.” A similar provision relates to teachers.[289]

Two states, on the other hand, have passed laws emphasizing a
faith in the integrity and patriotism of their teachers. Although
their action preceded the legislation of the World War, yet it is
significant that there have been no restrictive laws since then in
these commonwealths. In 1911, Pennsylvania sanctioned a policy of
freedom of thought for her teachers by declaring that “no religious or
political test or qualification” should be required of “any director,
visitor, superintendent, teacher, or other official, appointee, or
employee, in the public schools of this commonwealth.”[290] In 1913,
the General Court of Massachusetts forbade any school committee, by
rule, regulation or other means to restrain or penalize any teacher for
“exercising his right of suffrage, the signing of nomination papers,
and the petitioning or appearing before committees of the legislature”;
but it permitted school committees to forbid a teacher to exercise any
of the aforesaid rights, suffrage excepted, on school premises during
school hours or where the exercise interfered with the performance of
school duties.[291] Of great significance was the Massachusetts law of
March 17, 1917, which expressly prohibited inquiries relative to the
religious or political belief of applicants for positions in the public
schools and forbade the rejection or selection of the applicant on such
grounds.[292]

Many commonwealths, however, like New Jersey, have enacted laws
pertinent to teachers as citizens, but not openly and avowedly
“teacher” legislation. Such a law was approved February 13, 1918, by
the governor of New Jersey. It provided that “any person who shall
advocate, in public or private, by speech, writing, printing, or by any
other means, the subversion or destruction by force of the government
of the United States, or of the State of New Jersey, or attempt by
speech, writing, printing, or in any other way whatsoever to incite or
abet, promote or encourage hostility or opposition to the government of
the United States, or of the State of New Jersey, shall be guilty of a
high misdemeanor, and on conviction shall be punished by imprisonment
for a term not exceeding ten years, or by a fine not exceeding two
thousand dollars, or by both fine and imprisonment, in the discretion
of the court.”[293]

Of all legislation dealing with the teaching craft, that which has
attempted to control and direct the speech of the teacher has provoked
the greatest protest. Our political development has been such that an
interference with the free expression of opinion creates the impression
that a jealously guarded right has been invaded. It is this feeling
which has led to an agitation against such laws, although the fear
that a teacher may be an instrument for corrupting his pupils is not a
product of recent times either in this country or in world history.[294]

FLAG LEGISLATION AND OBSERVANCE DAYS

Legislation concerning the flag and special observance days takes on
the characteristics of other laws passed since 1917. One of the first
“flag laws” was passed in 1918 by Maryland. This law declared as the
purpose of its enactment that “the love of liberty and democracy,
signified in the devotion of all true and patriotic Americans to
their flag and to their country, shall be instilled in the hearts and
minds of the youth of America.”[295] Two years later, when the tide
of legislation for encouraging patriotism was at full flood, a law
embracing all schools through institutions of higher learning passed
the legislature. By this statute all public and private schools,
with the exception of professional schools, were required to open
their exercises “on at least one day of each school week, whether
morning, afternoon, or evening, with the singing of the ‘Star Spangled
Banner.’”[296]

Reverence and respect for the flag was the purpose of Oklahoma’s
statute in 1921. To insure obedience to the law, which was applicable
to all public, private, parochial and denominational schools, the
penalty of imprisonment or a fine could be imposed upon an offender.
“Any teacher,” affirmed the law, “neglecting to display said flag or
carry out said ceremonial, or any person forbidding or hindering the
display of said flag or the carrying out of said ceremonial shall be
subject to discharge or removal and shall also be punished by a fine of
not less than one hundred dollars or more than five hundred dollars, or
by imprisonment in the county jail for not less than sixty days and not
more than six months, or both.”[297]

Minnesota, in passing “An act to provide for the teaching in all the
common, graded, and high schools of this state of exercises tending to
promote and inculcate patriotism,” was actuated by a like motive in
1917. Here a half hour daily must be devoted to patriotic exercises
in all public schools, and every teacher should, by special exercises
and by the teaching of subjects especially suitable, encourage and
inculcate the spirit of patriotism. Such exercises were to consist of
the singing of patriotic songs, readings from American history and from
the biographies of American statesmen and patriots.[298]

Of slightly different character was the agency for propagating
patriotism devised by the Alabama legislature in 1919, by which was
established the “Alabama Patriotic Society.” This organization,
non-political and non-sectarian, essayed as its objects “to stimulate
patriotism among the people; to teach the fundamental principles
of American institutions, or free government; to develop in the
hearts and minds of Alabamans a deeper love of country and reverence
for the American flag; to expound the underlying principle of
self-determination; to immortalize the heroes who have brought fame and
renown to Alabama by reason of their courage and leadership in all the
great wars, in which Alabamans have engaged; to teach the people to
love their State, to respect her laws and to support the Constitution
of both the State and Federal Government; to bring the people together
to the end that unity of purpose and solidarity may be promoted; to
hold discussions of patriotic and political questions affecting the
general welfare of the whole people, and to issue educational pamphlets
and matter to aid in carrying the purpose of the society fully into
effect.”[299]

In North Carolina, October twelfth has been set aside for appropriate
exercises in the public schools “to the consideration of some topic
or topics” of state history.[300] In Oklahoma, November sixteenth has
been designated for a like purpose in order to teach “loyalty and
patriotism” to state and Union.[301]

Since 1918, the date November eleventh has become the occasion for a
commemoration of the general rejoicing which was caused by the signing
of the Armistice. In the state of Washington, the law has ordained that
it shall be “the duty of each teacher in the public schools ..., or
principal in charge of the school building, to ... present a program of
exercises of at least sixty minutes in length, setting forth the part
taken by the United States and the state of Washington in the world
war for the years 1917-1918, and the principles for which the allied
nations fought, and the heroic deeds of American soldiers and sailors,
the leading events in the history of our state and of Washington
Territory, the character and struggles of the pioneers, and other
topics tending to instill a loyalty and devotion to the institutions
and laws of our state.” West Virginia also has recognized Armistice Day
as a time fitting for “appropriate ceremonies.”[302]

A joint resolution of the legislature of Maryland in 1920 memorialized
the President of the United States to designate November eleventh of
each year as a day for national thanksgiving. This day, the General
Assembly believed, had been “made sacred to the hearts of the American
people, in that it was the day on which the world’s greatest tragedy
was arrested and the awful pull at the people’s heart strings relaxed,”
and on which “there terminated that war which overthrew the inhuman
monster who laid blood-hands upon nearly every home of a peace-blest
earth.” The world was further assured on this day, the lawmakers
declared, that “the struggle of democratic nations for liberty and
for righteousness had triumphed over the kultur and the crime of the
scientific barbarians, and that autocracy and diabolical tyranny lay
defeated and crushed behind the long rows of white crosses which
stretch across Europe....” The legislators desired that the day
should be the occasion for “strengthening of those noble sentiments
of patriotism common to the American people, and to the love for the
cause for which the sons of Maryland fought and gave their lives in the
World War,” and it was recommended that the schools observe the day in
a “fitting and impressive manner.”[303]

An act amending the law relating to holidays in Wisconsin, in 1923 set
aside Lincoln’s and Washington’s birthdays for commemorative exercises
in the public schools of that state.[304] North Dakota took similar
action, adding October twelfth and November eleventh for observance
except in communities where special exercises were held.[305] In
Michigan, in addition to observance days previously prescribed,
Roosevelt’s birthday, October twenty-seventh, and “Liberty Day,”
November eleventh, have been designated for “proper and appropriate
commemorative ceremonies.”[306]

South Dakota, in 1921, declared that Memorial Day should also be
known as “Citizenship Day” in that state, at which time each citizen
who had become twenty-one years of age during the year, or who had
been admitted into full citizenship of the United States during that
period, should receive a “citizenship certificate signed by the
Governor, attested by the Secretary of State, and countersigned by the
Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of the County in which
such citizen resides.” The certificate included the name, age, and
residence of the citizen, who also received a “manual of citizenship”
containing “the Mayflower Compact, the Declaration of Independence,
the Constitution of the United States and of South Dakota,” and
“non-political axioms and discussions of the principles of popular
citizenship.”[307]

Such laws were but the outpouring of a dynamic and enthusiastic
patriotism, and were considered by the legislator another means of
awakening and encouraging a love of country.

TEXTBOOK LEGISLATION

Few states since 1917 have passed laws requiring a uniform series
of textbooks: North Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Arkansas,
Tennessee, and West Virginia. In all of these states, except North
Carolina, textbooks in local history and in local and national civics
were added to the uniform series in United States history.[308] In
North Carolina the state textbook commission was empowered to select
histories for the elementary grades.

The only other legislation of this period, except that designed to
censor the content of history textbooks, was the resolution of the
Georgia legislature of 1918. This resolution endorsed the preparation
of a suitable textbook in civil government. It came from the State
Board of Education, who, in 1913, had condemned the textbook then in
use and had suggested the readoption of Peterman’s _Civil Government_,
temporarily, until one which would be satisfactory could be prepared.
From the action of the legislature in 1918, it is evident that no
book had been written which met the approval of the State School Book
Commission. The restatement of the resolve of 1913 merely sought to
call attention to the need for such a book.[309]

The outstanding legislation of the period, which deals with history
textbooks, results from opening the flood-gates of apprehension
regarding the content of school histories. It is the same misgiving
which prompted restrictive legislation regarding the speech of the
teacher and required an open avowal of allegiance to the government
of the United States. Here, again, the vital thing in the mind of the
lawmaker is to repress any statements considered by him as likely to
undermine American patriotism.

In 1918, New York approved another Lusk law prohibiting the use of any
textbook which contained statements seditious in character, disloyal to
the United States or favorable to the cause of any enemy country. The
law created a commission composed of the commissioner of education and
two persons designated by the Regents of the University of the State
of New York. To this body any person might present written complaints
against textbooks in “civics, economics, English, history, language
and literature,” which were then to be examined “for the purpose of
determining whether such textbooks contain any matter or statements
of any kind which are seditious in character, disloyal to the United
States or favorable to the cause of any foreign country with which the
United States is now at war.”[310] In case the commission disapproved
of the book after examination, the law prescribed that the reasons
be forwarded to all boards of education, who then must abandon the
use of the book. It was further provided that any person in authority
continuing to use a condemned book would be considered guilty of a
misdemeanor.

Less drastic legislation than the New York law was passed in New
Hampshire in 1921, declaring that “no book shall be introduced into the
public schools calculated to favor any particular religious sect or
political party.”[311] Other legislation which can be considered in the
same category was passed in Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee and California,
in their prohibition of “partisan and sectarian” books.[312]

During the years of 1922 and 1923, systematic efforts were made by
private organizations to control the content of history textbooks. In
general, the criticisms against the histories then in use were directed
by patriotic and racial organizations seeking to revive the traditional
treatment of relations with Great Britain, particularly during the
American Revolution and the War of 1812.[313]

An outgrowth of this agitation against school histories was the law
of Wisconsin approved April 5, 1923. This statute has prescribed that
“no history or other textbook shall be adopted for use or be used in
any district school, city school, vocational school or high school,
which falsifies the facts regarding the war of independence, or the
war of 1812 or which defames our nation’s founders or misrepresents
the ideals and causes for which they struggled and sacrificed, or
which contains propaganda favorable to any foreign government.” The
law has also provided that a complaint against any textbook filed
by any five citizens with the superintendent of public instruction,
must be heard within thirty days at the county seat of the county in
which the complainants reside. The statute has made it the duty of the
superintendent to pass upon the case ten days following the hearing
and to exclude from the schools any book found to contain statements
prohibited by the enactment. In 1925, a bill embodying substantially
the same spirit and phraseology was presented to the Massachusetts
House by Mr. Garrity of Boston, but was not enacted into law.[314]

Oregon has a similar law. The use of any textbook has been prohibited
which “speaks slightingly of the founders of the republic, or of the
men who preserved the Union, or which belittles or undervalues their
work.”[315]

In the spring of 1923, the Assembly of the state of California passed
a bill excluding from the schools of the state any history or other
textbook “which falsifies the facts regarding the war of independence,
the war of 1812, or any other war of this country, or which defames our
nation’s founders, defenders, heroes or patriots, or misrepresents the
ideals and causes for which they struggled and sacrificed, or misleads
by stating but partial facts, or which contains propaganda that is
unfavorable to this country and government, and favorable to any other
government or other type of government.” The bill met defeat in the
Senate.[316]

In the spring of 1923 a bill of like nature passed the Senate of New
York but failed in the Lower House. By this proposal, known as the
Higgins Bill, any American history was prohibited in the primary or
secondary schools of the state, “which falsifies, distorts or denies
the acts of oppression recited in the Declaration of Independence, or
which, if a textbook dealing with the period immediately preceding
the Declaration of Independence, fails to refer, ... to the principal
acts of oppression as set forth in the Declaration of Independence.”
It further forbade the use of any history which “belittles, ridicules,
doubts or denies the services and sacrifices of American patriots,” or
which “emphasizes and enlarges upon the possible human failings or
shortcomings of such patriots without giving at least equal prominence
to their virtues or merits.” The bill prescribed for primary schools
the presentation of episodes calculated “to arouse in children a
justifiable pride” in the winning of “our national independence.” It
further placed under ban any textbook which “misrepresents” or “fails
to mention ... the compelling causes of the respective wars waged ...
against foreign interference, aggression or encroachment, or which ...
fails to emphasize ... the final victory of the United States in any
war it prosecuted to a successful conclusion,” or which “belittles
or ridicules ... American soldiers, sailors or marines in our wars
against foreign nations ... as to leave ... a contempt” for them or “an
unwarranted skepticism regarding their successes under arms.”[317]

A bill of like import was introduced in the New York Senate in 1924.
It included a provision for the training of teachers in the best
methods of teaching American history, as well as the requirement that
American history textbooks include the Declaration of Independence
“in its entirety,” if dealing with the American Revolution.[318]
Senator Higgins was also responsible for a resolution instructing
the Commissioner of Education to investigate the history textbooks
used in the schools of New York to ascertain whether any contained
matter misrepresenting events of the Revolution or ridiculing the
Revolutionary patriots.[319]

In January, 1924, a bill relating to the selection of American
histories as textbooks and reference books in the public schools was
introduced into the Assembly of New Jersey. It was designed to exclude
any history which “belittles, falsifies, misrepresents, distorts,
doubts or denies the events leading up to the Declaration of American
Independence or any other war in which this country has been engaged,
or which belittles, falsifies, misrepresents, distorts, doubts or
denies the deeds and accomplishments of noted American patriots, or
which questions the worthiness of their motives or casts aspersions
upon their lives.”[320]

A spirited protest against the bill as introduced in the New Jersey
Assembly came from the faculty of Princeton University who resolved
that “such legislation is in direct contravention of the fundamental
principles of freedom of speech and of the press, and calculated to
impair the integrity of education in both the public and private
institutions in the State of New Jersey.”[321]

_The New York Times_ also objected to the censorship proposed in that
state, declaring that it was not conceivable that “any honest man would
wish to write textbooks in history for children under such statutory
prescription,” and _The Freeman_, in an article regarding the Wisconsin
law, pointed out that “historians sometimes find it a difficult matter
to get at the truth in regard to the past, but for the superintendent
of schools in the state of Wisconsin it is no job at all....”[322]

AMERICANIZATION OF FOREIGNERS

The desire to instil a knowledge of American institutions has led
to much legislation for the education of the foreign element in our
population. Some states have attempted to eliminate illiteracy by
evening classes for adults, by continuation schools and like means.
In all cases, the teaching of the English language has been a primary
purpose, as well as training in a knowledge of American institutions.
However, not all Americanization laws have definitely stated the
purpose of training in citizenship, and therefore do not come properly
into this discussion.

Since 1917 more than one-third of the states have enacted legislation
for the purpose of developing a love for this country in the foreign
born.[323] In that year, California inaugurated the policy of “home
teachers” to visit the homes of pupils instructing both children and
adults in matters pertaining to “school attendance, sanitation, the
English language, and in the fundamental principles of the American
system of government and the rights and duties of citizenship.”[324]
Two years later, this enactment was followed by another law for the
teaching of civic and vocational subjects in evening classes, in
which instruction was provided in the “duties and responsibilities of
citizenship” for those unable to speak or read the English language to
the proficiency of the sixth grade.[325] In 1921, California continued
her Americanization program by approving a law to provide for the
establishment of classes for training in citizenship for applicants
who had filed their declaration of intention to become citizens of the
United States and for other persons desiring such instruction. The
course of study includes the teaching of United States history, state
and community civics, the “constitution of the United States with
special reference to those sections in the constitution which relate
directly to the duties, privileges and rights of the individuals, and
such allied subjects ... as shall properly prepare such applicants to
understand and assume the responsibilities of citizenship.”[326]

In 1918, New York passed a law necessitating the attendance of all
non-English speaking and illiterate minors at school or at classes
established by employers in shops, stores, factories, or plants in
which were taught English and civics.[327] In 1921, it became a duty
of the commissioner of education to see that schools for the education
of these illiterate groups be established, in which should be taught
“English, history, civics, and other subjects tending to promote good
citizenship and increase vocational efficiency....”[328]

In Massachusetts, power has been granted to the director of the
division of immigration and Americanization, with the approval of an
advisory board, to employ methods which will develop in the foreign
born “an understanding of American government, institutions and
ideals.”[329]

Arizona’s law of 1918 permitted the establishment of night schools
in school districts for those over sixteen who were unable to read or
write the English language, in which there was to be instruction in
“American ideals” and an “understanding of American institutions.”[330]

The year 1919 saw the adoption of Americanization programs by the
legislatures of Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania,
Delaware, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Utah, Montana and California in which
the purpose of teaching American ideals and institutions received
express mention.

Maine’s statute, designed for those persons “of normal mentality over
eighteen years of age who are unable to read, to write, and to speak
the English language to a reasonable degree of efficiency,” prescribed
the teaching of “the duties of citizens in a democracy” and of “such
other subjects as will increase their civic intelligence.”[331] In her
legislation, New Hampshire called for “the abolition of illiteracy and
the instruction of illiterates over sixteen years of age in the common
school branches and in the privileges, duties and responsibilities of
citizenship.” Immigrants over sixteen years of age were to be taught
“to appreciate and respect the civic and social institutions of the
United States,” and to be instructed “in the duties of citizenship,”
which are “an essential part of public school education.”[332] In Rhode
Island, people between the ages of sixteen and twenty-one years of
age, unable to read and write English or to speak it with reasonable
facility, have been given the privilege of a continuation school
held for the purpose of teaching the English language and American
citizenship.[333] Pennsylvania’s attempt to cope with the problem has
led to the passage of an act “to provide instruction in citizenship
and the principles of the government of the United States of America
and of this commonwealth to foreign-born residents of the state of
Pennsylvania, in the several counties thereof, who are not required to
attend the public schools of this commonwealth.”[334]

The Delaware law was designed for the foreign-born over sixteen years
of age not able to speak English, but who, through evening classes,
might be instructed in that language and “in the institutions and forms
of government of the United States and the State of Delaware.”[335]

An appropriation of the Minnesota legislature of 1919, to carry out a
provision of an Americanization law of 1917, became available for work
providing for instruction in English for those whose knowledge is too
limited to carry on business or to read intelligently periodicals and
newspapers, and in the essential and vital facts of American history,
American government and ideals, and the duties and obligations of
citizenship.[336]

By a joint resolution of 1919 the Oklahoma legislature created a
committee on Americanization and made it incumbent upon public school
officials to organize classes in English and in citizenship instruction
wherever a petition signed by ten residents of foreign birth over
sixteen years of age was presented to them.[337] A minimum of two
hundred hours of instruction during the school year aided Utah in her
Americanization program which included classes in the “fundamental
principles of the Constitution of the United States, American history,
and such other subjects as bear on Americanization.”[338] Montana’s
legislation, designed for those over sixteen years of age who were
not familiar with the English language, provided for instruction in
“American history and the Principles of Citizenship and any other
school subjects which the school trustees deem necessary for the
Americanization of the students enrolled.”[339]

The Americanization movement was further aided by a law approved April
19, 1920, in which New Jersey provided instruction for the foreign
born residents of her state, over fourteen years of age, in English
and “in the form of government and the laws of this State and of
the United States.”[340] American history, the Constitution of the
United States, with an exposition of the privileges and the duties
of American citizenship tending to produce a spirit of loyalty, were
phases of the Americanization programs of Ohio, Idaho, Wyoming, and
Oregon in 1921.[341] In the last state, “home teachers,” whose duty it
is to instruct in the fundamental principles of the American system of
government and the rights and duties of citizenship, were named as an
aid in carrying on the work of Americanization.[342] In Michigan, the
superintendent of public instruction has been given power to provide
for the education of aliens and of native illiterates over eighteen
years of age who are unable “to read, write and speak the English
language and who are unlearned in the principles of government” of
Michigan and of the United States.[343]

In general, the most popular means for educating the alien population
is by attendance at a night school, where, through evening classes,
teachers regularly employed in the public schools seek to instruct in
the English language and in an appreciation of and respect for “the
civic and social institutions of the United States.” New York has
tried the employers’ school to effect the same purpose, whereas “home
teachers” are endorsed by California and Oregon. In the four years
preceding the outbreak of the World War, 5,174,701 immigrants came
to the United States, of whom 22.1 were unable to read and write any
language. In 1920, nearly one and a half million, or 11 per cent, of
the foreign-born whites in this country could not speak English. For
this group, even more than for the native element, has it seemed wise
to encourage education, because it has become a common belief that a
lack of education endangers the well-being of the state.

FOOTNOTES:

[228] _Report of the Committee on Social Studies of the Commission on
the Reorganization of Secondary Education of the National Education
Association_, “The Social Studies in Secondary Education,” Bulletin,
1916, No. 28, Department of the Interior (Washington, 1916).

[229] According to a statement in _The New York Times_, March 30, 1924,
the National Security League has been partly responsible for many
enactments requiring the teaching of the federal constitution.

[230] _General Laws_ of Vermont, 1917, ch. 60, sec. 1277, p. 301.

[231] _Laws_ of Montana, 1917, ch. 128, par. 601, p. 309; _Digest of
the Statutes of Arkansas_, 1919, ch. 158, par. 9066, p. 547. Accepted
February 20, 1917.

[232] In 1921, New Hampshire included in her curriculum the study of
history and civil government in a law to reinstate foreign languages as
a study in the public schools. In 1919 history and civics were required
for all schools. _Laws_ of New Hampshire, 1921, ch. 85, sec. 10(3), p.
125; _ibid._, 1919, ch. 106, sec. 13(1). In 1918, Connecticut carried
over a law from the _Revision_ of 1902 prescribing United States
history, _General Statutes_ of Connecticut, 1918, ch. 44, sec. 835,
Vol. I, p. 308. Pennsylvania incorporated a law of 1911 prescribing
instruction in general history and civil government in her _Statute
Law_ of 1920, _Digest of the Statute Law_ of Pennsylvania, 1920, par.
5102, p. 470. In Kentucky, United States history, state history and
civil government were required in 1918, carried over from a law of
1893. _Statutes_ of Kentucky, 1918, art. III, par. 4383, Vol. III, p.
866; _Laws_, 1916, ch. 24, art. III, sec. 24, p. 162. In Texas in the
_Compiled Statutes_ of 1920, was again included a law requiring the
teaching of civil government and state and national history. _Statutes_
of Texas, 1920, art. 2783, p. 467.

[233] _Laws_ of Delaware, 1919, 2283, sec. 11, p. 356. This is found
also in _Laws_, Special Session, 1920, 97th Assembly, sec. 12, Vol.
XXXI, p. 113.

[234] _General Laws_ of Alabama, 1919, art. 3, p. 571; _Acts_ of
Georgia, 1919, sec. 18, p. 295.

[235] _Compilation of the Statutes of Tennessee_, 1917, art. XV, 1453,
Vol. I, p. 983, _ibid._, 1454.

[236] _Statutes_ of Texas, _op. cit._

[237] _Laws_ of South Dakota, 1919, sec. 7511, p. 154.

[238] _Laws_ of California, 1917, ch. 549, p. 728. Approved May 18,
1917. It was the same for the social studies for the elementary schools
in 1921. _Statutes_, 1921, ch. 486, p. 739. A law of Illinois in
which instruction was to be devoted to “raising the standard of good
citizenship” was passed in 1909, and was still on the statute books in
1917. _Revised Statutes_, 1917, p. 273.

[239] _Revised Code_ of South Dakota, 1919, par. 7660, p. 1917. Source
1918, ch. 39.

[240] _Statutes_ of Texas, 1920, art. 2904, aa, p. 492. _Acts_, 1918,
ch. 17, sec. 1, p. 29.

[241] _Ibid._, approved March 20, 1918.

[242] _Laws_ of New York, 1918, ch. 241, art. XXVI-C, secs. 705, 706,
pp. 886-887. See the discussion under Oaths of Allegiance as Teacher
Requirement for a statement regarding the repeal of the Lusk Law.

[243] _General Acts_ of Massachusetts, 1918, pp. 294-295; _Acts_,
1920, ch. 411, p. 418. _General Statutes_ of Connecticut, 1918, ch.
45, sec. 852, Vol. I, p. 312. In 1903, Connecticut was a pioneer in
this form of law, which was slightly changed in 1915. At this time it
was prescribed that normal schools and teacher training schools should
give instruction concerning methods of teaching citizenship, including
the knowledge of the form of the national and local governments.
Connecticut left her law of 1915 unchanged in her _General Statutes_ of
1918.

[244] _Acts_ of New Jersey, 1919, ch. 125, p. 304.

[245] _Laws_ of Pennsylvania, 1919, sec. 1607, pp. 544-545. Amends an
act of May 18, 1911. In 1921 the law relating to courses of instruction
for public and private elementary schools was amended but carried with
it the requirement of United States history, history of Pennsylvania,
and civics including “loyalty to the state and national government.”
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Public Instruction, _The
School Law_ ... 1921, sec. 1607, p. 116.

[246] _Laws_ of Ohio, 1919, secs. 7645 and 7762, p. 542. Approved
June 6, 1919. _Acts_ of Iowa, 1919, ch. 406, p. 535. Approved April
25, 1919. Private as well as public schools were included. _Laws_
of Kansas, 1919, ch. 257, secs. 2 and 3, p. 352; _Session Laws_ of
Washington, 1919, p. 50. Alabama in 1919 added community civics to
her elementary school curriculum but merely enumerated her subjects.
_General Laws_ of Alabama, 1919, art. 3, sec. 7, p. 571.

[247] _Laws_ of Maryland, 1920, ch. 656, p. 1248.

[248] _Resolves_ of Maine, 1921, ch. 25, p. 27.

[249] _Laws_ of New Hampshire, 1921, ch. 85, sec. 5(3), p. 114.

[250] _Acts_ of Michigan, 1921, no. 209, secs. 1, 2. _Cf._ Iowa’s law
of 1921, page 80.

[251] _Wisconsin Session Laws_, 1921, ch. 81, p. 152. Amends sec. 40.
30.

[252] _Laws_ of Illinois, 1921 (House Bill, no. 483), pp. 820-821.

[253] _Acts_ of Iowa, 1921 (S. F. 770), pp. 81-82; _Laws_ of Nebraska,
1921, ch. 53, sec. 6924, p. 230.

[254] _Acts_ of Oklahoma, 1921, ch. 112, secs. 1, 2, 3, 4. The state
superintendent of instruction had power of enforcement. In case of
a violation a fine of not less than $100 and not more than $500 or
imprisonment in the county jail for not less than thirty days nor more
than six months, or both, may be the penalty. A teacher is subject to
discharge or removal in case of malfeasance and a college (corporation)
is liable to a revocation of its charter.

[255] _Laws_ of Colorado, 1921, ch. 216, p. 728. Approved April 5, 1921.

[256] _Acts_ of Arizona, 1921, ch. 140, sec. 1, p. 312.

[257] _Statutes_ of Nevada, 1921, p. 28 (Senate Bill No. 43).

[258] _Laws_ of New Mexico, 1921, ch. 172, p. 364. See law of 1912,
page 52.

[259] _Statutes_ of California, 1921, ch. 486, p. 739. See page 43.

[260] _Acts_ of Virginia, 1922, p. 69 (amending section 702 of the
_Code_). _Virginia School Laws_, 1923, p. 41; _Public Laws_ of Rhode
Island, 1922, ch. 2195, sec. 17.

[261] _Laws_ of Utah, 1921, ch. 95, p. 284. Approved March 5, 1921.

[262] _Laws_ of Nevada, 1917, ch. 146, p. 245. Approved March 21, 1917.
This was less than one month before the United States entered the World
War, and the avowal of service in peace or in war, therefore, acquires
a peculiar significance. See page 81 for Nevada’s law of 1921.

[263] _Compiled Statutes_ of Idaho, 1919, p. 269, par. 944. From the
_Political Code_, 1901, sec. 1067, Vol. I, p. 329. See page 21 for the
first discussion of the law.

[264] “In all public schools of this state it shall be the duty of each
and every teacher to teach morality, for the purpose of elevating and
refining the character of school children up to the highest plane of
life; that they may know how to conduct themselves as social beings in
relation to each other, as respects right and wrong and rectitude of
life, ...” _Statutes_ of Wisconsin, 1917, 40. 30 (5), p. 376.

[265] Statement of the Arkansas law. _Cf._ Oklahoma law passed in 1921,
page 80.

[266] _Digest of School Laws ... of Arkansas_ ... 1923, p. 166.
Approved March 23, 1923, this law provides that no person can graduate
from high school without at least one full year’s work in American
history and civics. _School Laws of Mississippi_, 1924, ch. 283, p. 3;
_School Laws of Ohio_, 1923, p. 41; _Public School Laws of Tennessee_
... 1923, p. 35; _Acts of West Virginia_, 1923, ch. 10, sec. 92, p.
40; State of Kansas, Senate Bill No. 13, repealing Sec. 72-1103 of the
_Revised Statutes_ of Kansas, 1923.

[267] _Laws_ of Alabama, 1923, p. 87, approved July 27, 1923; _School
Laws of the State of Idaho_ (1923), p. 57; _Acts_ of New Jersey, 1923,
ch. 17, p. 17; _Laws_ of Oregon, 1923, ch. 7, sec. 102; _Laws_ of Utah,
1923, ch. 4, approved January 27, 1923; _Laws_ of New York, 1924, ch.
64, article 26-d, sec. 707, approved March 24, 1924. _School Laws of
Delaware_, 1923, pp. 62-63. _The Public School Law of North Carolina
Codification_ of 1923, p. 120.

[268] _School Legislation of the Thirty-Eighth Legislature_ (of Texas),
pp. 36-37. The Texas requirement comes through a resolution of the
Senate of the state with the House of Representatives concurring,
because “the American Bar Association, the Texas Bar Association, the
bar associations of various other states, as well as other patriotic
societies, are advocating the teaching of the Constitutions of the
United States and of the several states in the public schools.”

[269] _Laws_ of Minnesota, 1923, ch. 291, p. 388. Approved April 17,
1923.

[270] _Laws_ of New Mexico, 1923, ch. 148, sec. 1417, p. 325; also _New
Mexico School Code_, 1923, p. 34.

[271] _Statutes_ of California, 1923, ch. 176, secs. 1 and 2. _Georgia
School Code_ ... 1923, p. 70, approved August 20, 1923.

[272] The following provide that the course start not later than the
eighth grade: _Statutes_ of California, 1923, ch. 176; _Laws_ of
Alabama, 1923, p. 87, law approved July 27, 1923; _School Laws of
Delaware_, 1923, pp. 62-63, approved March 14, 1923; _School Laws of
the State of Idaho_ (1923), p. 57; _Laws_ of Minnesota, 1923, ch. 291,
p. 388, approved April 17, 1923; _Oregon School Laws_, 1923, p. 39,
_Laws_, 1923, ch. 7, sec. 102; _Public School Laws_ of Tennessee, 1923,
p. 35, _Laws_ of Tennessee, 1923, ch. 17, sec. 1, pp. 61-62. In New
Jersey, the seventh grade is prescribed for the beginning of the study.
_Acts_ of New Jersey, 1923, ch. 17, p. 17. In Arkansas, it is required
that “such teaching shall commence in the lowest primary grade,” but
Arkansas history may be substituted for American history in one of the
grades. _Digest of School Laws of Arkansas_, _op. cit._

[273] _Congressional Record_, 68th Cong., 2d Sess., Vol. LXVI, No.
77, pp. 5396-5398. The five states not enacting social study laws for
the curriculum (1917 to 1924) are Florida, Maryland, Missouri, North
Dakota, and South Carolina.

[274] Few states during this period have enacted new laws requiring
the examination of teachers in the social studies. Nevada, by a law of
1921, has required United States history, civics and current events for
elementary school certificates. _Laws_ of Nevada, 1921, ch. 208, sec.
25, p. 302. In 1923, Tennessee prescribed that all persons applying
for a certificate to become teachers or superintendents in the public
schools must pass a satisfactory examination upon the provisions
and the principles of the Constitution of the United States. _Laws_
of Tennessee, 1923, ch. 17, sec. 2. Washington, likewise, by an
enactment of 1923, has prescribed United States history for a standard
elementary certificate. _Laws_ of Washington, 1923, p. 579. Florida, in
1923, enacted legislation requiring United States history, including
the Constitution of the United States for primary and third grade
certificates, civics for second grade, and general history, in addition
to the other social studies for a first grade license. _Compilation
of School Laws of Florida_, 1923, _Supplement_, pp. 4-5. Maryland, in
1922, required United States and Maryland history and community civics
for elementary school certificates. _Maryland Public School Laws_,
1922, p. 40. See pages 52-56. Iowa, in 1924, made mandatory a knowledge
of “the fundamental principles of a republican form of government and
the Constitution of the United States and of the State of Iowa.” _Code_
of Iowa, 1924, ch. 193, sec. 3862. Kansas, in 1925, prescribed United
States history and civil government for certification. See Senate Bill
No. 13, 1925.

[275] _Public Acts_ of Michigan, 1915, p. 13.

[276] _Statutes of Nevada_, 1915, ch. 274, secs. 1, 2, 3, 4. Approved
March 26, 1915.

[277] _Statutes_ of California, 1915, approved May 20, 1915. _School
Laws_ of California, 1921, p. 203. This law does not forbid aliens to
teach in colleges and universities.

[278] See page 76. _Laws_ of New York, 1917, ch. 416, par. 568, Vol.
II, p. 1280.

[279] _Ibid._, 1919, ch. 120, 3, p. 218. Law, March 31, 1919. _Ibid._,
1918, ch. 158, par. 550, p. 749. Approved April 4, 1918.

[280] _Ibid._, 1921, par. 555a, Vol. III, p. 2048.

[281] _Ibid._

[282] _Laws_ of Washington, 1919, sec. 1, p. 82; _Laws_ of Nebraska,
1919, ch. 250, sec. 1, p. 1020; _Acts_ of Michigan, 1919 (no. 220),
sec. 1, p. 392; _Laws_ of Tennessee, 1919, ch. 91, p. 223; _Compiled
Statutes_ of Idaho, 1919, par. 946, Vol. I, p. 270. Idaho, in her
_Laws_ of 1921, has another enactment, but it has the same purpose;
_Laws_ of 1921, sec. 77, p. 464. _Laws_ of Montana, 1919, ch. 196,
sec. 18, p. 429, amending law of 1905, by which any teacher holding a
certificate and not a citizen was given time (six months) to declare
his intention. _Political Code_, ch. 77, sec. 1912, p. 167. For
California’s law see _School Law of California_, 1921, p. 203. North
Dakota’s previous citizenship requirement is discussed on page 34. See
_Laws_ of North Dakota, 1921, ch. 111, p. 90. According to letters
received from the state superintendents of Mississippi and Maryland,
aliens are not permitted to teach in those states.

[283] _Laws_ of Ohio, 1919, supplements 7852 of _General Code_, sec.
7852-1, p. 514. _Laws_ of Colorado, 1921, ch. 213, sec. 1, p. 719.
_Laws_ of Oregon, 1921, ch. 115, p. 226, approved February 18, 1921.

[284] _Statutes_ of Nevada, 1921, sec. 38, p. 303. Approved March 22,
1921. This was required of all teachers paid by the state, even those
in the University.

[285] _Acts_ of Oklahoma, 1921, ch. 15, p. 141. Approved March 24, 1921.

[286] _The School Law of West Virginia_, 1923, p. 44. According to the
superintendents of public instruction in Rhode Island and Kansas a
pledge to support the national and state constitutions is a requirement
in those states for all teachers. See _Teachers’ Pledge of Loyalty_,
Rhode Island Public Education Service, and _Teachers Contract_, State
of Kansas.

[287] _Laws_ of South Dakota, 1921, ch. 210, p. 317. Approved February
1, 1921. This law became effective at once, because it was “necessary
for the immediate preservation of the public safety and for the support
of the state government and its existing public institutions.”

[288] _Oklahoma School Laws_, 1923, p. 18; _Acts_ of Oklahoma, 1921,
ch. 15, sec. 2, p. 141. California _Assembly Bill_, No. 1329, 1923,
sec. 6. “Any teacher or official of any educational institution in
California who shall teach or speak before his or her pupils or public
gatherings of an educational nature, or publicly, slightingly or
contemptuously of the Constitution of the United States, or of the
framers thereof, or of the men who founded this republic, or helped
preserve and defend it, or its heroes and patriots, or shall teach
un-American principles, or fail to carry out and support the spirit of
this act according to its true intent and meaning, shall be deemed to
have voluntarily violated his or her contract or oath of office and
shall be automatically removed if the charges are proven....” See page
102 for the section of the bill relating to textbooks.

[289] 68th Congress, Public--No. 595--_H. R. 12033_. An act making
appropriations for the government of the District of Columbia and other
activities chargeable in whole or in part against the revenues of
such District for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1926, and for other
purposes. According to _The World Tomorrow_, “Missouri attached a rider
to its last appropriation bill forbidding State colleges and schools to
employ any person ‘who teaches, or advocates in public and private that
the citizens of this State should not protect the government of the
United States from aggression by other nations.’” _The World Tomorrow_,
Vol. VIII (June, 1925), p. 186.

[290] _Statute Law_ of Pennsylvania, 1920, art. XXVIII, par. 5393,
p. 494. _Public Laws_, 1911, art. XXVIII, par. 2801, p. 309, May 18.
This is quite the opposite of Arkansas’ law which prescribed that all
teachers must believe in a “Supreme Being.”

[291] _General Acts_ of Massachusetts, 1913, ch. 628, p. 556. Approved
May 8, 1913.

[292] _Ibid._, 1917, ch. 84, p. 76. A fine of no more than fifty
dollars could be imposed for violation of this law.

[293] _Laws_ of New Jersey, 1918, ch. 44, sec. 2, p. 131. Laws have
been passed in California, Connecticut, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas,
Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York,
Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Mississippi,
and West Virginia.

[294] Socrates is an example of one who, in ancient times, was
penalized for holding doctrines then unacceptable.

[295] _Laws_ of Maryland, 1918, ch. 75, sec. 1, 176a, p. 121. Approved
April 10, 1918.

[296] _Ibid._, 1920, ch. 381, sec. 1, p. 665. Approved April 16,
1920. In Michigan all applicants for an eighth grade diploma have
been required to pass an examination on “the first verse of the Star
Spangled Banner and the words of America.” _General School Laws of
Michigan_, 1923, p. 107, am. 1919, act 72 (275), par. 5824, sec. 2.

[297] _Acts_ of Oklahoma, 1921, ch. III, p. 137. Approved March 24,
1921.

[298] _Laws_ of Minnesota, 1917, ch. 108, sec. 1, p. 135. Approved
March 26, 1917.

[299] _General Laws_ of Alabama, 1919, no. 733, p. 1083. See page 62
for a law of Oregon passed in 1921.

[300] _Public School Law of North Carolina_, pt. XIII, art. 38, sec.
367.

[301] _School Laws of Oklahoma_, 1923, p. 69; _Session Laws_, 1921,
sec. 342.

[302] _Laws_ of Washington, 1921, ch. 56, p. 171. “Victory and
Admission Day.” California added Armistice Day to her legal holidays in
1921, likewise including “Admission Day” on September ninth. _Statutes_
of California, 1921, ch. 350, p. 481. _School Law_ of West Virginia,
1923, p. 32.

[303] _Laws_ of Maryland, 1920, pp. 1448-1449.

[304] _Laws_ of Wisconsin, 1923, ch. 337, amending section 40.28 of the
statutes.

[305] _Educational Laws_ of North Dakota, 1923, ch. 282, p. 45. See
page 62 for Oregon’s law of 1921 setting aside Columbus Day for
observance.

[306] _General School Laws of Michigan_, 1923, p. 107.

[307] _Laws_ of South Dakota, 1921, ch. 144, secs. 1, 2, pp. 235-236.
The certificates were to be presented with proper ceremony at some
place where there were patriotic addresses and music. Approved March 8,
1921. In South Dakota an observance of “Frances Willard Day,” besides
the recognition of the benefits of prohibition, had the additional duty
of stimulating “patriotism and civic improvements.” _Revised Code_,
1919, par. 7662. Washington set aside January sixteenth as “Temperance
and Good Citizenship Day” for studying the biographies of great leaders
in “temperance and good citizenship.” _Session Laws_ of Washington,
1923, ch. 76, p. 236.

[308] _Acts_ of Georgia, 1919, sec. 18, p. 295; _Laws_ of Florida,
1917, ch. 7374 (no. 116), p. 230, added to United States history,
history of the state and civil government, _Laws_ of 1911-12, for high
schools American history and civil government, English history, and
general history; _General Laws_ of Alabama, 1919, art. 23, p. 634;
_Digest of the Statutes_ of Arkansas, 1921, par. 9066, p. 2330, also
_Laws_, 1921, act 285, p. 328 for regular grade work; _Compilation of
Laws_ of Tennessee, 1917, art. XVII, 1461a 24, Vol. I, p. 993, also
_Laws_, 1919, ch. 142, sec. 3, p. 525, Sen. Bill no. 506; _Code_ of
West Virginia, 1916, ch. 45, par. 155a, p. 594. General history was
also included. _Public School Law of North Carolina_, 1923, p. 87, art.
30, sec. 322.

[309] _Laws_ of Georgia, 1918, p. 919 (no. 60). This is probably an
outgrowth of the movement found in the previous period to teach history
and government from a pro-Southern viewpoint.

[310] _Laws_ of New York, 1918, 674, p. 892, approved April 17, 1918.

[311] _Laws_ of New Hampshire, 1921, ch. 85, sec. 13, p. 125.

[312] _Acts_ of Georgia, 1919, p. 295; _General Laws_ of Alabama, 1919,
p. 634; _Compilation of Laws_ of Tennessee, 1917, 1461a 24, Vol. I, p.
993; _Statutes and Amendments_ Code of California, 1917, ch. 552, 1607,
p. 736.

[313] For a full discussion see chapter VII.

[314] “..., the state superintendent shall fix a time for a public
hearing upon such a complaint, which shall not be more than thirty
days from the date of filing said complaint, and shall be conducted
by the state superintendent or the assistant state superintendent, or
by one of the state inspectors of schools, to be designated by the
superintendent, and which hearing shall be held at the county seat
of the county where the complainants reside. Notice of such hearing
shall be given at least ten days prior to the date thereof through the
public press and by registered mail to the complainants, the school
board interested and to the publishers of such textbooks.” _Laws_ of
Wisconsin, 1923, ch. 21, sec. 40.30. Massachusetts House Bill No. 718.
“An Act relative to Certain Textbooks in the Public Schools.”

[315] _Oregon School Laws_, 1923, ch. III, sec. 571, p. 169.

[316] Assembly Bill (California) No. 1329, introduced by Mr. Ball.

[317] State of New York, 3d Rdg. 652, Nos. 602, 1781, 1997, Int. 581.
In Senate, February 7, 1923.

[318] State of New York: No. 1186, Int. 1086. In Senate, March 5, 1924.
Introduced by Mr. Higgins.

[319] _The New York Times_, March 19, 1924.

[320] _Assembly, No. 14 (with Amendments), State of New Jersey._
Introduced January 8, 1924, by Mr. Williams. (For the Speaker.) The
bill provided also that any forty citizens of a school district could
file complaints against histories and a public hearing should be held
within thirty days.

[321] _The New York Times_, February 12, 1924. The endorsement given
this bill by patriotic and fraternal groups is treated on pages 275-276.

[322] _Ibid._, April 19, 1923, _The Freeman_, Vol. VII (May 2, 1923),
p. 170. The Oklahoma legislature of 1923 forbade the use of textbooks
teaching the “‘Materialistic Conception of History’ (_i.e._) The
Darwinian Theory of Creation vs. the Bible Account of Creation.”
Approved March 24, 1923. House Bill No. 197. The use of the term
“materialistic conception of history” is interesting in this connection.

[323] Among the states which have Americanization laws that have no
specific statement prescribing the teaching of American citizenship are
Alabama, Connecticut, Iowa, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota,
Oregon, South Dakota, Virginia and West Virginia. Most of these laws
were enacted in 1919, some prescribing the establishment of classes
for uneducated adults, others specifying Americanization courses. In
North Carolina, there is a law to remove illiteracy, and in New Mexico
the schools are to give “nocturnal courses of instruction.” These laws
are not discussed because they do not provide for the teaching of
citizenship. One of the earliest evening schools was in Massachusetts,
1886, where United States history was one of the prescribed subjects.
_Supplement to Public Statutes of Massachusetts_, 1882-1888, ch. 174,
p. 117, “An Act for the Establishment and Maintenance of Evening
Schools.”

[324] _Statutes_ of California, 1917, ch. 552, p. 742.

[325] _Ibid._, 1919, ch. 605, sec. 4, p. 1049.

[326] _Ibid._, 1921, ch. 489, p. 742. Approved May 27, 1921.

[327] _Laws_ of New York, 1918, ch. 415, pp. 1257-1258.

[328] _Ibid._, 1921, ch. 327, Vol. II, p. 1037.

[329] _General Laws Relating to Education, Massachusetts_, 1923, p. 18.
“Education and Protection of Aliens,” 1917, 321, par. 2; 1919, 350,
par. 59; 1920, 72.

[330] _Acts_ of Arizona, 1918, ch. 10, sec. 1, p. 29 (Sen. Bill No.
19). In 1921 a bill for the education of foreigners in the public
schools was passed.

[331] _Laws_ of Maine, 1919, ch. 148, p. 148. Revision of ch. 116, sec.
137. Approved April 1, 1919.

[332] _Laws_ of New Hampshire, 1919, ch. 106, secs. 5 and 30, pp. 157,
165. Also _Laws_, 1921, ch. 85, sec. 5, p. 113.

[333] _Acts and Resolves_ of Rhode Island, 1919, ch. 1802, sec. 2, p.
212.

[334] _Laws_ of Pennsylvania, 1919, no. 311.

[335] _Laws_ of Delaware, 1919, ch. 158, sec. 1, p. 452; also by a
similar law approved April 7, 1921, _Laws_, 1921, ch. 165, p. 550. For
California, see page 106.

[336] _General Laws_ of Minnesota, 1919, for ch. 356 of _General Laws_,
1917.

[337] _Session Laws_ of Oklahoma, 1919, ch. 135, p. 467. Approved March
10, 1919.

[338] _Laws_ of Utah, 1919, ch. 93, sec. 4, p. 285. Approved March 20,
1919. This law was added to in 1921 with a provision for fees.

[339] _Laws_ of Montana, 1919, ch. 38, sec. 1, p. 91. Approved February
21, 1919.

[340] _Acts_ of New Jersey, 1920, ch. 197, p. 387.

[341] _General Laws_ of Ohio, 1921, sec. 7761-3, p. 101; _General Laws_
of Idaho, 1921, p. 418; _Session Laws_ of Wyoming, ch. 127, sec. 1, p.
188; _General Laws_ of Oregon, 1921, ch. 87, sec. 1, p. 139 (S. B. 171).

[342] _Ibid._ New York and Arizona also have laws in 1921. See page 106.

[343] State of Michigan, Department of Public Instruction,
_Explanation of School Laws of Michigan_, Supplement to Bulletin No.
13. Published 1921, p. 7.

                               CHAPTER V

            DISLOYALTY CHARGES AGAINST TEACHERS SINCE 1917

Great events occasion diverse opinions, and it is not strange that the
World War and its aftermath often tempted public school teachers to
enter the area of controversial issues. Thus the question of whether
the teacher should be permitted free and open expression of opinion
became a point of contention between the upholders and opponents of
unrestricted speech. It became a matter of considerable concern whether
the teacher be allowed to sow the seed of an idea alien to that held
by the child’s parents, or, perhaps, in disagreement with that of the
school’s administrators. It was not a new question nor unexpected.

The great mass of public school teachers were conscious of the
censorious eye fixed upon them and realized that “the wise man
foreseeth the evil and hideth himself, but the foolish pass on and
are punished.” Diligent search in public records and through personal
inquiry reveals few occasions where actual charges of disloyalty
were lodged against teachers in the public schools. Indeed, the
superintendents of public instruction in thirty-two states report
that from 1917 to 1924 no accusations involving the loyalty of
teachers were brought to the attention of their offices.[344] One is
disposed to concur in a statement made by the Lusk Committee of New
York investigating seditious activities that “on the whole, it may
safely be said that our public school system is comparatively free
from the taint of revolutionary teaching.”[345] Yet some teachers
faced accusations impugning loyalty. Doubtless there were others whose
utterances were considered disloyal or ill-advised, but who escaped
with little or no publicity attending their dismissal from service.

In the city of New York, the trials of teachers for disloyalty were
most numerous, for it was here that legislation to restrain the speech
of the teacher was most rigorously applied. Under the Lusk Law persons
failing to secure a certificate of loyalty were forbidden to teach in
the schools of New York, the Commissioner of Education having the sole
right to refuse such a certificate.[346]

In general, charges of disloyalty were preferred against six groups
of teachers: those objecting to sign the pledge of loyalty, those
whose sympathies in the War were pro-German, the pacifists, those
whose speech was considered disloyal, those who opposed and obstructed
the draft, and those who held membership in a political party which
advocated a change in the established form of government.[347]

In the eyes of the school administrators an unwillingness to sign
pledges of loyalty without qualification was but the evidence of
a hybrid patriotism. In no other light did they believe could be
considered the objection to a pledge which declared an “unqualified
allegiance to the Government of the United States,” and which promised
by “word and example” to “teach and impress” upon “the pupils the
duty of loyal obedience and patriotic service as the highest ideal of
American citizenship.”[348]

Opposition to signing the pledges under compulsion was led by the
Teachers’ Union, and their protest against an implication of disloyalty
was endorsed by eighty-seven teachers.[349] Among those refusing at
first to sign a pledge were Miss Isabel Davenport of the New York
Training School for Teachers and Harrison C. Thomas of the De Witt
Clinton High School. The examination started to determine their fitness
to teach was discontinued when they agreed to sign the pledge.[350]

In March, 1918, the charge of pro-Germanism was lodged against Miss
Gertrude A. M. Pignol, a teacher in the Manual Training High School in
Brooklyn, and her suspension was asked by the Board of Superintendents.
Miss Pignol, a native of Berlin, had been a resident of the United
States since 1905. In 1911 she had taken out citizenship papers.[351]
When questioned by secret service agents, it developed that, although
her sympathies were with Germany, she had in no way been connected
with German activities in this country. In the hope that her views
might undergo a change Miss Pignol was given a leave of absence for
three months. In May, 1918, however, Associate Superintendent Tildsley
preferred the following charges against her before a committee of the
Board of Education: that she did not believe in war, that she was under
the impression that it was not necessary for the United States to be
engaged in the War, that she would not pledge her coöperation in every
way in her power to the United States government in its measures for
the prosecution of the War against Germany.[352]

In Miss Pignol’s trial, statements from fellow-teachers were cited
as proof of her pro-German bias. A remark, alleged to have been made
eleven years prior, that she would be ashamed to be an American
citizen, was adduced as evidence. Further proof was found in a
statement that she doubted the accuracy of the accounts regarding
German outrages; that she had attempted to dissuade a German woman
from returning to Germany because she would eat food needed by the
Germans; that she objected to the posting of a food card by the school
librarian; and that she was deeply touched by the slaughter of the War.
The possession of a locket, engraved by her father and carrying the
picture of the Kaiser’s grandfather on one side and the cornflower on
the other, was put in evidence as additional proof of her hostility to
the cause of the United States.[353] Although she asserted her desire
for an American victory, the confession that she did not want her
native land crushed militated against her.[354] On June 26, she was
dismissed from service by the Board of Education.[355]

On October 24, 1918, Fritz A. E. Leuchs was suspended from duty in the
schools, charged with “conduct unbecoming a teacher.” His suspension
was confirmed on October 30 by the Board of Education. According to
his own testimony, he had tried for four years to enlist in the German
army, but on October 25 had entered upon military service in this
country. Under the circumstances the Board of Education resorted to
suspension in order that he could not claim the difference in pay as a
teacher and a soldier.[356]

Similar treatment was accorded pacifists serving in the schools. In
this group was Miss Mary McDowell, a Quakeress, employed in the schools
of Brooklyn, who was suspended from duty on March 12, 1918. She based
her defense in the unrestricted exercise of religious faith as a
birthright, her previous contributions to relief for American sufferers
to the Red Cross and other charitable projects, as well as the
distribution of thrift stamp circulars in the schools. Miss McDowell’s
retention as a public school teacher was opposed on the ground that
her pacifist views were ill-advised at a time when patriotism should
be taught in act as well as in speech.[357] On June 19, 1918, she was
dismissed from service by the Board of Education.[358] Following the
close of the War Miss McDowell’s case was reopened, which resulted
in her reinstatement on July 11, 1923. On reviewing the causes for
Miss McDowell’s dismissal, Commissioner Bowe declared: “After full
consideration of the case, the committee has decided that the
punishment meted out to Miss McDowell was too severe. She was tried
at a time of great public excitement. Since then public feeling has
undergone considerable modification. For thirteen years she had done
excellent work as a teacher....”[359]

An unwillingness to engage in active service resulted likewise in the
suspension of Louis H. Blumenthal, a teacher of history and civics in
Public School 148, Brooklyn, on June 19, 1918.

Nor were all teachers willing to obey a law precluding criticism of the
government. To secure permanency of tenure through silent assent was
to some but a bribe against their convictions. And not all were agreed
that it was wise to refrain from teaching what they held true because
others saw in the same belief the germs of disloyalty.

Such a disagreement as to how freely a teacher could express opinions
led to investigations of the loyalty of Florence Levine, Samuel D.
Schmalhausen, Thomas Mufson, and A. Henry Schneer. In the case of
Miss Levine, a teacher in Public School 168, Brooklyn, the Teachers’
Council, to whom the case had been referred, recommended that she be
admonished by the Acting Superintendent of Schools so that thereafter
she be careful in her public utterances, but no charges were preferred
against her.[360]

It was quite different in the cases of Mr. Schmalhausen, Mr. Mufson,
and Mr. Schneer. On November 13, 1917, they were suspended from the
faculty of the De Witt Clinton High School for holding views considered
not only subversive to discipline in the schools but injurious to good
citizenship.[361] Their trials took place before a committee of the
Board of Education on December third, at which they were represented by
counsel. The charges against Mr. Schmalhausen involved the writing of
essays by his students, in which, it was said, an unpatriotic attitude
was permitted to pass unchallenged by the teacher. According to the
testimony, the pupils were directed to write “An open letter to the
President” commenting frankly within the limits of their knowledge
upon his conduct of the War against the German Government.[362] Mr.
Schmalhausen was also accused of asserting that he did not consider
it his duty “to develop in the students under his control instinctive
respect for the President of the United States as such, for the
Governor of the State of New York as such, and other Federal, State and
Municipal officers as such.”[363]

One of the themes, upon which attention at the trial was focused, had
been written by Hyman Herman, a Jewish student sixteen years of age. It
was addressed “to the Defender of Humanity and Champion of Democracy,
Woodrow Wilson.” In his testimony Mr. Schmalhausen asserted complete
ignorance of this essay until it was called to his attention in an
interview with Associate Superintendent Tildsley two weeks after it had
been written.[364]

In the theme the writer propounded such questions as the following:
“But how is it that the United States, a country far from democratic
(and daily proving itself to be such) and England, the imperial and
selfish (and we exclude all minor participants) undertake to slam
democracy upon a nation whether it likes it or not? What unparalleled
audacity to attempt to force 70,000,000 people to adopt a certain kind
of government. If we mean their benefit, then the Germans surely know
what they want and need us not....

“... Finally if our aim be the annihilation of Prussianism, then why in
the name of Heaven have you refused the offer made by Germany, which
included the evacuation of Belgium, disarmament of nations and freedom
of the seas? Surely then your purpose is to get supreme domination
and to crush Germany for no reason it seems, except a mad desire for
murder, meanwhile making us the goats.”[365]

Mr. Schmalhausen had annotated the theme, after it had been placed in
his hands by Dr. Tildsley, with such statements as “irrelevant,” “not
accurately presented,” and “for a thoughtful student this statement
sounds irrational.”[366] The defense contended that such annotations
were sufficient to prove Mr. Schmalhausen’s disapproval of the
sentiments expressed, but the prosecution argued that his failure to
denounce them openly indicated his lack of loyalty.

As a witness for Mr. Schmalhausen, Herman, the author of the theme,
testified that he had not received his impressions of this country’s
attitude toward war questions in any sense from Mr. Schmalhausen,
although since the time of writing the theme he had changed his
attitude due to a study of his history textbook[367] and the attitude
of his history teacher.[368]

In turn, Mr. Schmalhausen, defending his own patriotism, declared that
President Wilson’s “interpretation, his attitude, his points of view in
relation to the war for democracy” met with his “complete intellectual
approval,” and that, although he had opposed the policy of conscription
instead of a volunteer system, when adopted, he had complied with the
request of the Government, as did others within the proper ages.[369]

The second instructor in the De Witt Clinton High School who was
arraigned before the Board of Education on December third was Thomas
Mufson, charged with thinking it proper to be neutral while his class
debated such subjects as the purchase of Liberty Bonds, the active
support of the Government in various measures for carrying on the War,
the wisdom of an early peace, and the relative merits of anarchism and
the form of the government of the United States.[370]

Mr. Mufson defended himself against these charges on the ground that
he was not justified in imposing personal views upon his classes on
controversial subjects. Furthermore, he said that he would not permit
a discussion of anarchism in his classroom, a topic he held far too
difficult for immature minds.[371]

The specific charges brought against Mr. Schneer arose from statements
it was alleged he had made regarding patriotism and the wearing of the
uniform of the United States army. It was held that he was opposed to
discussing patriotism in the schoolroom and that he objected to persons
wearing the uniform when speaking before the school, because it tended
to encourage militarism.[372] All of the charges Mr. Schneer denied,
protesting his loyalty to school and national authorities, and citing
as proof, among other things, the signing of the loyalty pledge of the
Board of Education.

Considerable discussion by the public and by teachers attended
these trials. Among those commending the Board of Education for
their vigilance were the Schoolmasters’ Association of New York and
Vicinity, who adopted a resolution expressing the hope that efforts
to suppress disloyal influences in the schools would be energetically
sustained.[373] On the other hand, the Teachers’ Union voted to give
the teachers on trial their “legal, moral and financial support,”[374]
and eleven college teachers requested that the decision against them
be delayed for further investigation.[375] Professor John Dewey was
reported to have likened the trial to “the Inquisition,”[376] and the
New York _Evening Post_ editorially declared that “the case not only
was prejudiced from the beginning, but was disingenuous in inception,
unfair in method and un-American in spirit.”[377] On December 19,
1917, these teachers were dismissed by the Board of Education.[378]
Later their appeal for reinstatement was denied by the Commissioner of
Education.[379]

In November, 1917, six other teachers of the De Witt Clinton
High School were transferred to other schools because lacking a
positive loyalty. Friends of the teachers ascribed their transfer
to their “independence” and not to a lack of loyalty.[380] The
absence of academic freedom and democracy in school organization, an
indefiniteness in the charges preferred against them, were all advanced
by the teachers themselves in extenuation of their acts.[381] According
to a statement of _The New York Times_, in the inquiry to determine
their fitness to teach, the teachers declared they had been asked such
questions as the following: “Should not a teacher inculcate instinctive
obedience to supervisors, no matter what the acts of the superior
officers may be? What is your opinion of the Bolsheviki? Do you believe
in revolution? Are teachers qualified to criticise superiors? Do you
believe in internationalism? Do you think a teacher ought to impose
his views on pupils? Is there not a presumption that whatever is, is
right? Would you rather have Hillquit or Roosevelt for mayor? What
would you do if a boy called President Wilson a murderer? Do you accept
Hillquit’s treasonable utterances? Does not the critical attitude in
children need suppression? Would you be willing for the boys in your
class to discuss Liberty Bonds pro and con? In the matter of the longer
day should the teachers have been consulted?”[382] That the teachers
were asked these questions was stoutly denied by Superintendent William
L. Ettinger.[383]

Closely allied with charges of disloyal speech were those growing out
of attempts to obstruct the government in its prosecution of the War.
Of such a nature was the charge brought against Miss Fannie Ross, a
teacher in Public School 88, Brooklyn, who, while acting as a registrar
in the state census, was reported to have expressed opposition to the
draft, to have given advice outside her line of duty, and to have gone
so far as to influence a man to claim exemption.[384] On December 26,
1917, Miss Ross was suspended from service for six months because of
“conduct unbecoming a teacher,” due “to tactless remarks.”[385]

The apprehension of the school authorities of New York City was further
reflected in the trial of teachers who were suspected of radical views.
This anxiety expressed itself in the withholding of certificates of
loyalty and morality at least during the investigation. Following the
War, membership in the Socialist Party, advocacy of Communism, and a
sympathetic attitude toward the Bolshevist program of Russia were the
chief charges preferred in the trials.

Among the first teachers summoned before the high school committee
of the Board of Education because of radical views was Harrison C.
Thomas, a teacher in the De Witt Clinton High School. Mr. Thomas was an
advocate of internationalism and of socialism, a conscientious objector
who had been excused from the draft, and avowedly not enthusiastic
over wartime enterprises like Liberty Bonds. When questioned regarding
his attitude in the classroom, he confessed that he would not conceal
the fact that he was an objector; that he believed resistance to
aggressiveness by force wrong; and that if Germany wanted to rule
this country submission would be better than forceful resistance.
Yet he declared that he had tried to get into reconstruction work in
France and that he would do anything except fight. As a result, his
certificate of morality and loyalty was withheld.[386] Similar action
was taken in the case of Bernard M. Parelhoff, of the George Washington
High School, who maintained that a nation which “teaches patriotism in
its schools is merely driving nails into its own coffin,” and because
he believed there should be no reverence for the uniform as such.[387]

Licenses were likewise withheld from other teachers, among whom were
Eugene Jackson, Austin M. Works, Garibaldi Lapolla, Abraham Lefkowitz,
Edward Delaney, and Wilmer T. Stone of the De Witt Clinton High School;
Ruth G. Hardy of the Girls’ Commercial High School; John J. Donohue,
Louis A. Goldman, Felix Sper and John J. Shipley of the Stuyvesant High
School; Max Rosenhaus of the Bushwick High School; Alexander Fichlander