The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1881-10-25

: rpeDoDdcnce between General juDN a.
Early aud William Malone, which oe-
cured In 1871, the greater part OF which
, was suppressed at the time, but retained IN
, the custody Of General Early, and subject
10 use az his discretion, viii be published
, in pamphlet form tomorrow. IL makes
twenty closely-printed pages. General
Early begins by referring to misslatements
, which have provoked the publication, ana
! TO the false impressions sought 10 De hiaoe
by Mahone papers and correspondents
The OCCASION OF the letters between inc
: two Generals was the publication in the
: New York Historical Magazine OF june
1870. Of a military sketch OF General Ma
hone. written by General J. Watts De Pcy-
ster. who stated in q note TO the memoir
that II had been submitted to General Ma
hone and approved by him rs 10 matters
which he alone could decide. lt was also
corrected by Colonel s. Ba.sett French IN
General Mahono's behalf. The biography
in question includes q very laudatOry run
ming tribute TO the talents and proves OF
Malone, whom it compares with John Tai
bot, Earl Of Shrewsbury, alike in small
size and in great powers Of grit and brain.
II likens Malone also to StOnewall Jackson,
and contains injurious reflections on seye-
raj Confederate officers, including General
Lee. OF the battle Of Fredericksburg II
siaics:
owe shall acc that from this time for
ward it was a happy thing for the North
that Malone had to fight as hard, II not
1 harder. against the merton and incompc-
trncy OF his superiors than he did against
/ the North or Union"
His allusion TO General Early is as fol-
lows:
'Nfahone's judgment was justified by
I The proyerb in regard to Early at West
I Point-that though his name was Early, ne
was ALWAYS late. Malone said that he did
not Ike to fight under him; that Jubal
/ Early was always hesitating whether to
/ fight or not. He would ride up and down
| his lines from fifteen TO twenty minutes,
debating whether or not TO begin, whereas
/ the battle was 10 be lost OF won mean
WHILE
The magazine containing this language
was not seen by General Early till March
of the next year. lie then addressed
note to Malone, calling his attention to the
paragraphs OF an offensive character, and
courtcously desired 70 know whether he
/ Ciahone) was responsible for them. To this
Malone returned q brief note, stating that
he had never seen the magazine and re-
qucStinQ the loan OF it, which was granted.
On the 2jth OF May, two months Of
ter General Elrly's letter had been de-
iiycred b Malone by Colonel Walter
II. Taylor, General Early was handed
Mshcac's reply by the hands of q
colorcd boy. Both parties were then in
Lynchburg. General Malone says, in his
answer, that he recognizes the article as
substantially the same as one previously
published in the New York Mail and the
CBimrey Corner. He Acknowledges to
have had one Interview with De PeystCr,
and insists that he cannot see where any
differences may be taken, however Justly or
imaginary, to the preiidice OF other off,
GERS. AS TO General Early himself, he
SAYS:
"That I did say to the author OF the
sketch did rot like to fight under Early -.
is true, for such was the feeling entertained
by myself, but not for the reason which
yoU would seem 20 inier-from no want Of
confidence in your personal courage. The /
reasons, in part, if given at the time, do /
appear whercfor it was that you were /
Objectionable TO ne as commander. In /
nv opinion OF YOU rs m officer, stated per- /
haps at this time and in this conjunction, l .
remember 10 have said, in substance, |
officer but he has n diSputatous order OF .
mind which leads to the entertainment Of .
two opinions. and that this in a general was .
faulty since delay was the consequence at 1
times when the battle might be fought and .
won"
CAuSTIC LETTER.
General Early's answer 20 this was dated .
Lynchburg, May 80, 1871. II was delivered .
to Malone by Major John w. Daniel. !
After referring to the delay, General Early |
holds Malone up to plain and direct an
swer to the specific question whether he (
(Mahoue) was responsible Tor the language F.
and statements attributed to him in De .
Peyster's article. General Early says:
"This was q very plain and ineligible .
inquiry, and if the memoir bad not been .
submitted 70 and approved by you De Pey-
ster had not told Tie truth, and ii he had
put language into your mouth which you
had not uttered, lie was equally guilty Of 1
ialseh0od. In this state of the matter there
was but one OF two courses for a candid
man to pursuc-cither to ayow or diSayow
the pretcnsions OF DE PeySter. To frankly
that bis statements were true
would make you responsible for the Ian
guagc attributed TO you, and TO deny them
would bring you in direct conflict with
hun. To escape from this dilemma you
have resorted to the eXpedient OF all men
who embark IN career Of deception. You
have undertaken 10 equiyocate and prevari-
cate, and, like all such men, you have sig
nally failed in your purpose. Your whole
answer is disingenUOus and evasiye, but
sufficient appears TO fully convict you OF
completely in the procurement and publica-
ton OF the memoir i'm question:
Pressing the matter further General
Early SAYS:
of YOU did not use the language
attributed to you, why this beating about
the bushI Ii you did Use it, then why
NOT say so and declare that il was not used
in the sense which it might seem to imply?
This shutting is utterly unworthy OF the
man who has made the manly Talbot and
Stonewall Jackson his models."'
Referring TO General Mahone's opinion
OF himself as a cOmmandeD General Early
says:
"Now, sir, to deal plainly with all this
special pleading OF yours, will say that ii
you mean TO state that while under my
command, or at any other time, you ever
saw me delay or hesitate to fight when oc-
esslou offered, you assert downrightfalse-
hood, rs you also did if you stated that |
would ride up and down my lines from if
teen to twenty minutes debating whether or
no to begin. Ii you mean that you ever
received such information from any re-
spectacle officer or soldier, believe you
arc guilty OF fa,Schood in that, for the
statement was untrue at all times and under
all circumstances. Ii you merely mean 10
assert an opinion deduccd from the fact that
! had a disputatiouS order OF mind, then
you were guilty OF the disrepUtabe effort
to iniure my reputation as an officer on
ridiculous pretcnces and without facts 10
sustain YOU