Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1871-01-20
THE LESSON OF 1.-THE TWO PICTURES

clusively by public events as to remove
| them beyond the sphere e. discussion.
| The question of rebellion is one Of them.
| The surrender of Lee and Johnston, and
! the adoption of the 18th, t4th and 18th
amendments, forever decided that the re-
bellion was lcrong. We do not propose, at
this day, TO be put upon the defensive
upon this question. We know that there
are thousands of men in the South who
are not willing to concede this but their
private opinions must be disregarded, for
public sentiment and future historians, the
world over, must, upon this question, re-
spect the decision of the armies marshaled
for final judgment upon the issue present
ed. The men who championed the issue
of secession on the one side must abide by
this decision and accept its results. That
verdict made them traitors, and no amount
of argument now can assign to them diff
ferent position. Our correspondent COM
plains because we call Gen. Lee a traitor.
Well, if he was not traitor, what was he
| If Gen. Grant had surrendered to him, he
would not perhaps, be so denominated in
history, but as he surrendered to Grant,
and as the arbitrament of the sword il
thereby made consistent with the intelli-
gent judgment of mankind, there is no es
cape from the decision. This result gives
us the basis upon which the issue taken by
| Mr.. Charlton is to be decided.
In claiming for Gen. Lee the virtues of
a Christian gentleman and brave soldier,
he begs the question. We are not now
discussing these; for admitting all that is
claimed for him on this point, it does not
change his public character, or the position
in history which his surrender impressed
upon him and his cause.
Recognizing this fact, what is the signi-
ficance of the action Of the Virginia Legis-
lature which is now endorsed?
1t is not, as Mr.. Charlton assumes, Il
vale virtues as a citizen; but it is the pub
| lie official recognition OF Gen. Lee, as the
head of the rebel army. Its significance
Just nor can not be mistaken. Virginia,
as one of the States foremost in rebellion,
after being first overcome by force of arms,
was restored to her position in the sister
hood of States. She was restored to that
position, and assumed it, upon terms that
most Enthusiastically implied a recognition
of her wrong. But no sooner is she re-
stored to her rights as a State, than she
hangs in her halls of legislation, a picture
of Gen. Lee, who was foremost in the very
wrong for which she was punished. She
hangs the picture in that place as a recog-
milton of Gen. Lee in his public character.
1t can have no other meaning, when taken
In connection with the refusal to honor
Gen. Thomas in the same manner. Does
any one doubt the latter's private virtues?
II not, and Virginia meant only TO honor
Robert Lee as private citizen. why not
honor. also, Geo. II. Thomas-equally wor-
thy and distinguished? They did not do
this and we all know why. There can be
no doubt, then, of the spirit or naotipe of
this act. But, if Virginia should thus re-
cognize Gen. Lee, so should Mississippi
recognize President JEFF. Davis, and Ten
nessee, Gov. Isham G. Harris. What
would be the spectacle such q course would
present? A people guilty of rebellion, re-
stored to their rights by the parent Gov
eminent. worshipping not only as house
hold gods the leaders in their wrong, bat
extolling their virtues az such leaders in
public halls of legislation thereby proving
not only that they did not recognize their
wrong, but publicly parading determine
ton to foster and build up aeentlment
which would as naturally encourage new
rebellion NJ fostering spirit of insubordi-
nation in child would make it an unruly
member of the household.
We have nothing to retract either as 10
the spirit or teaching of our yesterdays ar
ticle. We have no malevolent feelings to-
wards the Southern people. We have been,
and are now, as charitably and kindly dis
posed as any reasonable man can ask. We
appeal to the readers of the CHRoNICE, and
every fair man in this community to say
whether our course, either as Journalists or
as private citizens, warrant Mr. Charlton's
structures. We have done or said nothing,
either in the past or present, to warrant
the attack. We have been, and are now,
as disposed to forget the past as any one
ought to be, but we ink the spirit of Mr..
Charltons article itself is a warning that
we dare not forget 1t. His effort is to mis-
construe both the spirit and purpose of our
article. But we do not intend that our po-
sition shall be misunderstood. We have
repeatedly said that we do not expect the
Southern people to feel towards the lead
ers of the rebellion as do those who opposed
it. We cannot complain of their private
feelings towards Gen. Lee, but, to avoid
future rebellions and further misery, we
have the right to object to public acts,
where their significance and tendencies
are pernicious and calculated TO encourage
the very spirit that brought about the war.
The article we refer to is but proof of what
we first said, that it seems to be necessary,