Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1870-10-31
aMistellaneous.
GRANTS AND LEES ARMIES.

The London Standard of Oct. II pub
fishes the following letter from Gen. Ba-
/ deau:
! My attention has recently been drawn
to an editorial article in The Standard for
/ Oct. ,. which is devoted to Gen. Robot L.
! Lee. | have Of course no right, and Ger
tainly no desire, to dcprecatc the estimate
/ put by the Standard upon either the per-
sonal or the military character OF Gen.
Lee; but as the article in question contains
several statements evidently based upon
mi,nformation, / venture to ask that YOU
/ VIII allow me to correct them in your col
umns. | have the less hesitation in max
! ing this request, because my principal
authority Tor the proposed corrections is
that of Gen. Lee himself
! All the original documents still in exist
ence which once belonged to the South
ern War Office are now in the possession
Of the United States Government; for,
very soon after the capture of Richmond,
| they Were, by the express direction OF
| Mr. Jefferson Davis, surrendered by Gen
Joseph +. Johnston to Gen. Sherman. As
Military and private Secretary to Gen.
! Grant from the time when he took com
mand OF the armies OF the United States
until he became President, | have had for
Years unrestricted access, not only to his
own official papers. but to all these cap
+ tured archieves, and have had occasion to
study them more closely than any living
men.
/ In the article Of the Standard to which |
refer is decIared-doubtles in good faith.
for the declaration has been made before
and in other quarters-that Gen. Lee, at
the beginning OF the Wilderness campaign
had but 10000 men under his command,
While Gen, Grant had three times as many.
! The official documents do not confirm this
statement. The field return OF Lee, dated
nearest the first battles of the Wilderness,
is that OF April 20, 1861; this gives 3d.
/ S9l men present for duty but does not in
clude the strength OF Longstreets corps
j Now Longstreet joined Lee after April 20
and prior to the battle which occurred in
the first week OF May His field return of
date nearest 10 the battle shows lS, 3S7
present for duty, making 72,218 men un-
der Lee ut the battle OF the Wilderness.
The whole force present for duty under
Grant, as shown by his field returns of the
same date As Lees, was 9S,0l9, leaving
preponderance in favor Of Grant OF about
10000 men, or 4 very little more than one
third.
The calculation that Grant had three
I times as many men as Lee has been OBJ
tanned by omttng Longstreet's corps al
together from the estimate, and by giving
only Lees force present for duty on the
Rapidan; while. in reckoning Grants
numbers, not only the present for duty are
counted, but those constituting what. in
military parlauce, is called the total,
which includes the sick. the extra duty
/ .l,. =,
amounting, in any large army, to many
thousands Manifestly, either Lees total
should be compared with Grants total, or
Grant present for duty with Lees pres
eut tor duty. But besides this, in order to
make out Grants army three times as large
as Lees, Grants two forces in the Valley
Of Virginia and on the James River (each
at least one hundred miles from the Will
dcrness) are included in the estimate of
his strength; while the troops which Lee
had in front OF these separate forces of
Grant arc left ont of the calculation al
together. | repeat that in the battle of the
Wilderness, Lee had about y 900 men en-
gagged, while Grant had 5000 present for
duty-according to the confidential field
returns made at the time by each General
to his own Government, when no General
would Intentionally misstate or misead.
Again. ii is stated in the Standard article
OF the 9th inst. that Lee moved out OF Rich
mond, after its iall, with $4,000. His last
field return was made in February, 1860
it is signed in his own hand, and gives 80,
O9t present for duty, and 73.3i9 total.
This does not include the local militia of
Richmond, nor the crews OF the gunboats
in the James River both of which forces
were always put into the trenches in an
assault, and many of whom, doubtless,
moved out of Richmond with Lee. To-
re her they numbered, at least, several
thousands. In the battle of Five Forks
and the subsequent assaults on Petersburg,
which resulted in the capture of Rich
mond, Lee may have lost 20, 900 men, but
this would have left him by any computa-
ton. a. least I0,O00 troops with which he
fled from the fallen capital.
Once more, the article in question states
that 5000 men were surrendered BY Lee
a.1 .ippumatuX Court House The official
record show that y, ,4l6 soldiers were ac-
tually paroled at that place, beside the tens
of thousands al o belonging to Lees army,
who came in afterward and yielded them
selves prisoners of war Each OF these
gave his separate written parole. l was
present at the surrender OF Gen. Lee. The
event took place in a small room of what
seemed an ordinary farmhouse, and in the
/ presence of fewer than 20 persons. After
/ Gen. Lee had signed the capitulation he
| Immediately requested GEN Grant to sup
ply the prisoners with food, as they had
been living on two ears Of Indian corn a
day for several days. Grant at once
consented, and inquired of Lee how
many men he had in his command. Lee
replied that he could not tell; he had
received no returns for several days, his
troops had been killed or wounded, or cap
tured in such numbers that he could not es-
innate his actual force. Grant inquired il
-, 600 rations would be enough, and he
answered that he though they would 25,-
600 rttions We're accordingly issued the
same day by Grants officers to Lees army
/ This therefore was Lees idea OF his own
numbers on the day of his surrender, al
though, as proved by the paroles, it was
too small.
The original documents from which the
! ~