The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1885-04-16
GRANT AND THE SWORD OF LEE.
Gen. ::Jubsl A. Early Correots an Unwilling
Error of the Richmond "State."

Error of the Richmond "State."
The following letter and note, publish
ed in the Richmond State, explain them
selves:
To the Editor of the State. The story
that Gen. Grant had refused or declined
to receive Gen. Lees sword at the sar
render at Appome!tox, has been so otter
and so authoritatively denied that an
no little surprised at finding in an ediro'
rial in your paper of the Oath the follow
| ing statement:
"Lee Camp-the first of all the asso
Citations of old Confederates, bearing the
name of him who was the Southern
chieftain in the long history of splendid
battles-has not forgotten that no greater
honor was ever shown their hero than
that which was added to his fame when
his sword was chiyalrously refused by
the heart and hand of Grant at Apo.
mattox."
The fact is that Gen. Lees sword was
never rendered to Gen. Grant, and the
latter therefore had no opportunity to
decline to receive it or to return it after
it had beeR surrendered; but, by the
express terms of the capitulation, all the
officers of Gen. Lees army we're to be
allowed to retain their side arms, as well
as their horses and other private proper.
ty, and all couriers and other mounted
men of the artillery and cavalry, whose
horses were their private property, were
to be allowed to retain them.
r.
ces of Gen. R. e. Lee'' will be found the
correspondence between Gen. Grant and
Gen. Lee Immediately preceding the
surrender, and the same correspondence
is to be found in Appendix NJ to Gen.
Humphreys Virginia Campaign OF
1864, 1865" That correspondence fully
rebuts the idea that Gen. Lee ever con.
templated making an unconditional sur
render of his army, or that he was in.
debted to the magnanimity of Grant for
the terms of the surrender.
DIR. Jones, whose book was written
with the sanction of Mrs. Lee and other
members of the family, who gave him
access to Gen. Lees correspondence of a
private as we'll as official character, says
on pages 1923 that in a conversation
with a number of friends, of whom he
was one, Gen. Lee said that, before going
to meet Grant, he left orders with Long
street and Gordon to hold their com.
mapds in readiness, as he was determined
to cut his way through or perish in the
attempt if such terms were not granted
as he thought his army entitled to de.
mand. In the last and only. interview l
had with Gen. Lee sfter the war, which
was in the spring of 1869, when he talk.
ed very freely to me in regard to the
circumstances attending his surrender, he
reiterated in the most emphatic manner
the statement which DR.. Jones gives.
1t was not, therefore, to Grants mag
nanimity that Gen. Lee was indebted for
the privilege of retaining his sword, or
for the terms granted to his army, but to
his own resolute will land the anxiety of
Grant TO obtain the surrender OF an
adversary who had thwarted him so long.
There is, then, as little truth in this story
about Gen. Lees sword as there is in the
famous appletree fiction.
It would seem that the time for Grant
to display his magnanimity towards the
defeated Confederates was when ne occu-
pied the Presidency of the United States
for eight years. How he then displayed
it let i'm partial history tell.
Respectfully, J. A. EARLY.
Lynea5urg, March 26, 1885.
[Dr. Jones, Oh page So3, further says:
"Gen. Lee said that when he met Gen.
Grant they exchanged polite salutations,
and he stated to him al once that ne
desired conference in reference to the
subject matter of their correspondence.
Gen. Grant returned you your sword,
did be not, General p one of the compa-
ny asked. The old hero, Strengthening
himself up, replied in most emphatic
tones: No, sirl he did not. He had
no opportunity of doing 80. was de.
termined that the side-arms of officers
should be exempt by the terms of sur
render, and of course did not otter hlm
mine. ALI that was said about swords
was that Gen. Grant apologlzcd to me
for not wearing his own sword, saying
that it had gone off in.his baggage, and
he had been unable to get it in time"
What q Private Union Soldier Says.
DEs MONIES, Ia, April 4.-One of
the few surviving eye.witnesses OF Lees
surrender at Appomattox was interview.
ed yesterday concerning General Jubal
Early's recent denial of the story that
Lees sword was rendered General Grant
and refused by him. The mans name is
Benjamin Jefries, and he is a carpenter
by trade and resident of Des Moines.
He served through the war 10 Pennsyii-
vania regiment, and at the time of Lees
surrender was q member of Company A.,
191st, "Bucktails." When asked as to
the circumstances that followed the close
of the 6ghting at Appomattox, he said !:
After fighting ceased General Grant
rode to the front, where our regiment
was employed on the skirmish line, and
ordered that guard be stationed across
the road leading down to the village and
that no one be allowed to pass. Atabout
2 p. m. he returned, accompanied BY an
escort of 200 or 300 officers. Leaving all
but one aide behind, he rode throug h
LE6 lilies duU uOWu VIC oioPo to"oAN -
Court House, short distance off. As he
did 30 General Lee, accompanied by one
aide, came toward him from the opposite
direction. About sevenly.fve yards from
where we were stationed on guard stood
a small story and half log house, near
which grew a large apple tree. Grant
and Lee met at this point, and halted
under this tree. Lee rode large, hand
some roam, while Grant was mounted on
a small black horse. Dismounting, Lee
drew his sword and offered it to Grant,
but Grant refused to accept it, declining
it with wave of his hand, and it was
put back in the scabboard. Then Grant
offered his hand to Lee, and they shook
hands, as did their aides, and all engaged
in conversation for about FIVE minutes.
Then, remounting, they rode away to the
Court House, where the papers complet-
ing the terms of the surrender were
drawn up. I saw the first meeting
between Grant and Lee, and saw Grant
refuse 10 take his sword, for l stood less