Mineral Point tribune. (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1869-1938, 1885-02-26
ARMY OF NORTHERN VIRGINIA.
Did Lee Ever Contemplate Recon-
Tnending Malone as His Suceessor2


the following communication to Tae
Richmond State, under the date of
Lyuchburg, Feb 8;
In an article published it was stated
that ia the final conference. that was
held before the surrender Of Appomat
tox, Malone was one of the two officers
with whom alone Gen. Lee consulted.
and that Gen. Lee, when asked on
one occasion at his own table whom
he would recommend as his successor,
replied Malone.
Having had nay attention called to
the article. and deeming that Justice
to Gen. Lees memory required that
the foregoing statements should not
go anchallenge2. | addressed TO
General CurCis Lee the following let
ter:
'LYNcHBURG, Jan. 81, 1885 My
DEAR GENERAL: see that someone
has reiterated the story that appeared
some years ago ia a communication
to The New York Herald, that at a
dinner at his own house at LexIng-
ton, some time after the war,
your father, in reply to question by
one of the guests as to whom he would
have recommended as his successor in
in the event of his resignation or being
disabled, stated that he would have
recommended Malone 1t is also
stated that Malone was one of the
two officers whom your father con
suited about the surrender of Apo
mattox. When the story appeared in
The Herald, published an article IN
The Commonwealth Royall's paper,
which | think demonstrated its alb
surdity, and also the falsehood OF
some expressions Malone alleged
your father had used il regard to Mr..
Davis.
'The repetition Of this story now.
/ think, demands vindication of the
memory of your father against such
an lmputation as it implies. / there
fore, write to ascertain if you know
anything of its origin, and what9 ]
want your statement in regard to the
matter, but of course l Will not pub
lish anything you may say TO me
without your consent Very truly
yours, J. A. EARLY.
"GEN. G. w. G. LEE
To that letter | have received the
subjoined reply, to which there is a
postscript, in which, after expressing
a very natural reluctance to appear in
the papers in regard to such subject,
Gen. Curtis Lee submits the question
of publication to my discretion:
LEXINGTON, Va, Feb 2 My
DEAR GENERAL: / received several
days ago your letter of the 9th ult.,
but have deferred ans wering it until
inquiries could be made of those most
likely to have heard, or heard of, the
statement to which you refer. | can
not find anyone here who remembers
to have heard Gen Lee mention the
name of Gen. Malone, and / have
other reasons for believing that my
father never said anything to the Ell
feet that he would have recommended
Gen. Malone for the command of the
army Of northern Virginia. | know
nothing of the reported consultation
at Appomattox, had never heard OF
it before the reading Of your letter.
nor do know anything of the origin
of the stories Perhaps Col, Taylor
or other members of the staff may
have some information on the sub
jsct.
II remain, with best wishes for
your happiness, faithfully yours,
@. w. O. LEE
"GEN. J. A. EARLY, Lynchburg
Virginia"
1T must be borne in mind that Gen.
Curtis Lee, who was connected with
the Military Institute, was resident
at Lexington while his father lived
there, and, if not actually member
of the household of the latter, must
have been a frequent visitor there.
If, therefore, he not only can find nc
one in Lexington who ever heard his
father mention the name of Malone,
but has reasons of his own for believ
ing that his father never said that he
would have recommended Malone
for the command of the army OF
Northern Virginia, it would seem that
it would be eminently proper that
someone of those ideal guests to whom
Gen. Lee revealed his hidden purpose
of making Malone his successor n a
certain contingency should now re
veal himself. Then, too, if Malone
was one of two whom alone Gen. Lee
called into council about the surrender
at Appomattox, and if the former
was the Ney OF the retreat from
Petersburg, as stated in the article,
it is a little curious that Gen. Lee
should have designated Gems Long
street, Gordon. and Pendleton as
commissioners for adjusting the de
tails of the surrender, thus ignoring
Malone entirely, and that his letter
to Mr.. Davis, dated the 18th of April,
1865, giving an account Of the retreat
from Petersburg and the surrender at
Appomattox, should contain no men
ton Of Mahone's name even. See
letter, Jones Personal "reminiscences
of Gen. r. Z. Lee, pages 311-4 II
nav be observed also that in none OF
Gen. Lees published official reports,
including that of Gettysburg cam
paign, which was probably the last
detailed report he made, does Malone
name ever appear. Can it be that
Gen. Lee was jealous of the rising
greatness of his subordinate and
dreaded being supplanted by him, for