The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1868-09-09

These assaults on General Lee come with q
peculiar i'll grace from the Tribune. Why
does it's editor refuse to General Lee the lenity
| he praotised towards Jefferson Davis2 It
looks too much as if he were trying to make
pepitential amends for signing the bond of Mr..
Davis by severity towards less Objectionable
man. 1t would probably puzzle the Tribune
to tell why the commander of the Southern
armies should be held up to execration rather
than the chief of the Rebel Confederacy. If
General Lee was educated at West Point
(Which the Tribune makes principal charge
against him), so was Jefferson Davis. Mr..
Davis took an active and leading part in set
ting the rebellion on foot, but General Lee
went into 1t reluctantly at the last moment,
after his own State had seeded against his
wishes and judgment. The Tribune makes
this reluctance its chief ground of incubation:
in our opinion 1t enhances the lustre of Gene
raj Lees character. In motive, it was noble
sacrifice of private inclination to what he re-
garded as the lawful authority Of the body
polite. The Southern doctrine of allegiance
was no doubt erroneous; but it was neverthe-
less very sincerely held. The theory of Mr..
Calhoun had been set forth by that powerful
reasoner with such acuteness and ingenuity
that it commanded the nearly universal assent
OF the whole Southern mind-and of General
Lee among the rest. By that theory alle-
glance was due primarily to the State, and
only through it to the Federal Government.
The citizen of Virginia was made citizen
OF the United States by the free action of
Virginia in ratifying the Constitution; and it
was claimed that she had the same authority
to unloose that she originally had to bind.
Now as General Lee believed this doctrine
with all the sincerity of a frank, manly ma
ture, what was his duty as he understood it,
when his State came to secede Clearly, to
go with his state what ever his own private
Judgment might be respecting the expediency
of her act. Nobody disputes that it is the
sacred duty of citizen to submit his own
private inclinations to the public will of the
political community of which he is men,
ber. In General Lees case it was question
as to which of two Governments asserting
contradictory claims upon him, his obedience
was due. His error was a mere error of
judgment, shared by many other good
and able men. His noble loyalty to his
sense of duty sheds lustre upon his charac-
ter, and merits the esteem of all generous
men. There is no reasonable moral standard
by which it can be made ground of reproach.
But whatever estimate may be formed Of
the character of General Lee, it is an unques-
toned fact that he is the most influential
man in the Southern States. There is no
other whose Judgment and advice his fellow
citizens would follow with such implicit and
unhesitating confidence. Now it is the part
of craftsmanship to deal with facts as they
exist, and make the most of them. Shall the
great influence of General Lee be utilized. or
shall vain attempt be made to destroy it
Let us take for illustration a some what paral-
lei case. If the Italian Go 'ernment desired
to assure itself of the support and loyalty of
the followers of Garibaldi, the easiest and
shortest way would be by coming to an under
standing with Gaibaldi himself 1t would be
preposterous to revile him as a means of
conciliating his devoted admirers. 1t
would be preposterous to attempt to
ignore or vilify him go long as he
retained his great mastery over the atfec-
tions and enthusiasm of his followers. If
he exhibited moderate temper, and
willingness to use his influence for the COM
mon advantage of Italy, it would be prepos-
ferrous not to adopt so easy method of con-
trolling those who look to him for guidance.
The case of General Lee is somewhat similar
Like Garibaldi, he has no political authority,
but unbounded personal influence. The
wishes CT Lee are as potent in the quiet shades
of his college, as those of Garibaldi are in his
small island retreat. But Lee is not, like
Garibaldi, an opinionated, visionary agitator,
but calm, wise, just, practicable man, who
does nothing for display and would gladly
sacrifice all self-importance to the good of his
country. His letter in reply to General Rose
Grams is written in a spirit and temper which
he can easily diffuse throughout the whole
South. If the professions which he and those
who sign the letter with him make are pro-
fessions made in good faith, the country can
be tranquilized at any moment with complete
security for the stability of the Union and the
freedom of the negroes. Why, then, should
we not have pacitication by moral influence
which costs nothing, rather than the expen-
sive suhjugation under which the South has
so long lapguished?