Between the last gun of the Revolution and the first gun of the great War between the States seventy-two years intervened, and fifteen presidents had ruled. Nine of the fifteen presidents were Southerners, and fifty of the seventy-two years are to be credited to the South. To these facts add the long line of able jurists from the South headed by Chief Justice Marshal, and who can deny the dominating influence of the South in the early history of this Republic?

As with the statesmen and jurists, so with the military leadership. The Cavalier is a born soldier. He has a genius for war. An army of Cavaliers would have charmed the heart of Napoleon. In the war of 1812-14 who were the champion soldiers and who were the successful leaders? In the war with Mexico what section furnished the great bulk of enthusiastic soldiery?

Begin with 1765 and see the ruling hand of the South shaping events. Later see Virginia bearding the British lion, and see all the colonies aflame with enthusiasm as the result. See this same guiding hand giving strength and symmetry to the Republic at home and respect abroad. Turn your eyes to the efforts of the South in extending the borders of this republic from the seaboard to great Central Valley, and beyond the mountains to the waters of the Pacific. Whose brain chiefly conceived and executed the purchase of Louisiana? Through whose influence came the annexation of Texas? To what section are we chiefly indebted for the great Southwest? Whose liberal hand donated to the Union the great Northwest?

Notwithstanding these facts bringing unfading luster to the Southern section of our country this section is the constant subject of abuse. On the 24th day of August, 1909, Miss C. T. A. Duffy, of Atlanta, Ga., called attention of the editor of the Atlanta Georgian to an article in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, which deserves all and more the editor has said in reply. We copy the editorial in full as well as the letter of Miss Duffy:

"IS THE SOUTH EFFETE AND DECADENT? "The Encyclopaedia Britannica is a work which is found upon the shelves of numberless libraries in the South. On many topics

of information it is absolutely fair and just. But in the name of a people whose contributions to American statesmanship and literature have challenged the world's profound respect, the Georgian most indignantly protests against the libelous and untruthful strictures which this supposed repository of knowledge puts upon the South's intellectual activities.

Our attention has been called to the article in question by the following letter, which explains itself:

Editor Atlanta Georgian:

Please turn to page 360 of the Encyclopaedia Britannica (New Twentieth Century Edition, subject, "American Literature-Conditions and Characteristics of American Literature." You will find this statement:

"Since the Revolution days, when Virginia was the nurse of the statesmen, the few thinkers of Americans born south of Mason and Dixon's line-outnumbered by those belonging to the single state of Massachusetts-have commonly migrated to New York or Boston in search of a university training. In the world of letters, at least, the Southern states have shown reflected light; nor is it too much to say that mainly by their connection with the North the Carolinas have been saved from sinking to the level of Mexico or the Antilles. Whether we look to India or Louisiana, it would seem that the tropical sun takes the poetic fire out of the Anglo-Saxon veins, and the indolence which is the concomitant of despostism has the same benumbing effect. Like the Spartan marshaling his helots, the planter lounging among his slaves was made dead to art by a paralyzing sense known as his own superiority."

Will the editor of the Georgian please advise in its columns if a statement like this in what is known as the Great Encyclopaedia Britannica stands unrebuked by the Southern press? And speak frankly on the point as to the standing of the South as to its literature in comparison with the other sections of this country.

Very truly,

(Miss) C. T. A. Duffy, Atlanta, Ga., August 24, 1909.

In reply to the question which is raised in the foregoing letter, the Georgian desires to say several things.

First, by way of introduction, the writer of the article on American literature in the Encyclopaedia Britannica was disqualified alike by his prejudice and by his ignorance from handling the grave topic which he undertook to discuss.

And whatever may be the glitter of his name it remains that he has ignored the patent facts which are known and read of all men.

Even the most superficial acquaintance with the bare signboards of American history will suffice to show that for the first 80 years of our national life the South not only dominated the councils of government, but furnished leaders for every great forward movement, whether of politics or morals.

Starting with the Revolution itself, the South furnished its pen in Thomas Jefferson, its tongue in Patrick Henry, and its sword in George Washington.

The father of the Constitution was James Madison.

By universal consent, the greatest of all the judges who have worn the ermine of the supreme bench was John Marshal.

Whether in the forum or on the field, it is difficult to find the counterpart of rugged "Old Hickory."

Of the illustrious trio of American statesmen-Calhoun, Clay and Webster,-two were from the South.

The commander-in-chief of the American forces in the Mexican war was Winfield Scott.

And when the great division came in 1861 it was to one whose childhood was cradled in the forest of Kentucky that the call from the dominant party in the republic was made-Abraham Lincoln.

The man who succeeded him in the executive chair when the assassin's bullet struck him down was likewise from the SouthAndrew Johnson.

In the very forefront of modern commanders the severest of Northern critics have placed Robert E. Lee.

Colonel Henderson, of the British army, in two superb volumes, has told the matchless story of the valley campaigns of

Stonewall Jackson; and the work has become a text book in the military schools of England.

The man who discovered anesthesia-a boon which mitigated the suffering of 40 centuries and proclaimed the era of modern surgery was Crawford W. Long.

Does this argue an effete civilization or justify that the South has shown by reflected light?

If the South has really become effeminate, what a commentary is made by this humiliating fact upon the native American stock?

For in this section there has been less admixture with foreign elements than in any other; and the blood which ripples the veins of the South to-day is essentially the blood which settled the republic-the blood of Cowpens and Kings Mountain-the blood of Yorktown.

And on this last historic field which the South furnished to the struggle for independence went down the flag of the country which is today represented in the world of books by the Encyclopaedia Brittannica.

The number and character of our educational nurseries will also dispel the slanderous accusation that it is mainly by our connection with the North that we have been saved from sinking to the level of decadent Spain.

Preposterous!

In the effort to retrieve the consequences of war, the South has been severely handicapped; but no one of candid mind can contemplate what the South has accomplished since Appomattox without marveling at the result. She furnished most of the battlefields of the great conflict. She lost her slave property, which aggregated millions of dollars. Besides paying her own war debt, she has also paid her proportionate share of the debt, which was contracted to subdue her. Yet what miracles of growth has she performed in four short decades!

Today it is universally conceded that the South is the most prosperous section of the whole republic-yet she has only skirted the margin of her possibilities.

Nor is it true-to quote the fervid language of this grandiloquent writer-that the tropical sun has taken the poetic fire out of the Anglo-Saxon veins.

Sidney Lanier, Edgar Allan Poe, Henry Timrod, Paul H. Hayne, John R. Thompson, Theodore O'Hara and James Barron Hope-these give the lie to this libel.

While the South has published no encyclopaedias-while she has never sought to exploit her literary wares-while she has been willing for New England to manufacture most of the books which have vaunted the achievements of American men of letters-she is nevertheless writing for the ages.

The only American author whose books have been translated into seventeen different languages is Joel Chandler Harris.

Audubon, the great naturalist-John and Joseph LeConte, styled the genii of the scientific heavens-Matthew F. Maury, the great geographer-these are some of the South's contributions to the republic of letters.

In the book market of the present day there are few writers who either in popularity or in merit precede John Fox, Mary Johnston, Frances Hodgson Burnett, Ellen Glasgow, James Lane Allen, Thomas Nelson Page and scores of others whose names are household words.

The earliest inspirations of the genius of Mark Twain were caught from the dock scenes on the lower Mississippi.

And the brilliant imagination of Winston Churchill was quickened in the sunny edge of the Land of Dixie.

No, Miss Duffy, the Georgian is not willing for the article to which you have called attention to go unrebuked. It is wholly out of keeping with the spirit which should pervade a work of this kind. Moreover, it is slanderous to a people whose achievements, whether in the realm of intellect or of action, are such that they can dispense with flattery if only the sheer truth is told."