The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1888-03-21
If His Statements be True Gen.
Grants Are Untrue.
The Whole Story of Their Connec-
tion In the Work.
The Part He Took In the Writing
of the Memoirs.
Although Ho Did Not Write the Orig
inal Manuscript He Did All
the Editing The
Contracts.

morrow publish Gen. Adam Badcau's ver-
sion Of the controversy which has risen
between himself and Gen, Grants family
in regard to the claim which Gen. Badeau
makes for compensation for his services TO
Gen. Grant in the preparation Of his per
sonal Memoirs" The statement Is adj
dressed to 'the American public" and
fills several columns OF the Sun.
Gen. Badeau Is somewhat severe In his
structures ON the course pursued by Col.
Fred Grant In the matter lie says that
Gen. Grant called him away from his own
literary work 10 assist first in the prepara-
ton Of magazine articles and then that Of
the memoirs"
They thought this would occupy per-
haps three months whereas, in fact II had
occupied seven months when he retired;
| that Gen. Grant supposed he might real
lie $50, 900 TO $500 900 from the work, and
OF his own motion, since It's publication
would estop Gen. Badeau from realizing
fully on his intended "Liie OF Grant"
gave him (Badeau) the already published
contract TO pay him 5000 from the first
s20,0 profits and 5000 from the next
$4,000; that Gen. Grant insisted ON this
matter being kept secret; that when he
received his first installment of $1,000
| he paid Gen. Badeau $3.50, thus
ratiiying the contract; that ho (Badeau)
| finding that the work was 10 be such q re-
markable success, and realizing that his
own work, ON which he had spent sixteen
years, would be corrcspondingly injured,
ho wrote 10 Gen. Grant, suggesting a new
contract instead he received his letter OF
dismissal, all in the handwriting Of Col.
Fred Grant except his signature. Gen.
Badeau asserts that Col. Grant when Il
appeared that his father would be unable
| 10 finish the work, suggested that Badeau
complete II and allow II 10 be published IN
his (fred Grants) work. Gen Badeau
goes ON 10 say that love and loyalty 10
his chief has scaled his mouth az 10
the part which he actually took In the
preparation Of the work, aud that he has
waited and negotiated for a settlement
when he might have gone nj once into
court and enforced his contract. lie de-
clarcs that the family at first offered him
81 800; that this was subsequently raised
10 *, 900, and he agreed TO take that sum,
but q condition was attached TO draw from
him statement "A 20 the authorship Of
negotiations were broken of. His
part In the work he states as fol-
lows: ''for months I spent four
or Ave houm day at his
side, and many hours besides In my own
room, at work on his book. When wo
were together we sat at the same table.
and often, M soon as lac had written a
page, he handed II 10 me. did not writo
the original matter, and in that sense did
notcomposo the book. The thoughts were
Gen. Grants, and In most cases the origi.
nal draft OF the language. But suggested
much. told him when 10 insert descrip-
tons Of scenery, where 10 place an nc.
count OF character, how 10 elaborate n
picture Of battle; | recalled scenes and
Incidents 10 his memory In which ! had
participated, or with the story OF which
was familiar, and verified his statements.
did not compile data, m Col. Grant
supposcs. The data were compiled and
ready In my own history, and that he al.
ways took as his authority. | read up,
however, several works on the Mexican
war, and then went over what hc had
written on that subject, verifying and cor
rcciing II, almost rcmaking this portion as
far as construction and style aro concerned
discussed his statements and the adyiza-
bility of his expressions oi opinion, and
often persuaded him 10 change the
one or withhold or modify the other
And then when the subject matter
was settled, took this rough material
10 my own room and made any changes
saw N in language or style. / took out
whole pages. | transferred Others from
one part OF the book 10 another. ! modi.
fled any expression which dislikcd or
disapprovcd, and there was not page In
the frst volume, nor ono In tho second
down 10 the Wilderness campaign, which
did not contain dozen alterations or
notifications entirely mine. ] broke up
sentences, soitcned or heightened the
effect, corrected the grammar, and all
with the knowledge and sanction and by
the express aud repeated desire OF Gen.
Grant.
especially constructed the work. Gen.
Grant had very good power of clear aud
forcible expression In matters with which
he was familiar, or la which he was inter.
itous. These / always retained, aud
always sought 10 preserve his simplicity
and direcinces aud even ruggcdncss of
language; never 10 bctray my own share
In the work hut he never knew whether
what he wrote was good English, and his
slips In grammar were constant. lie
hal, besides, no idea whatever Of
building up chapter or a book,
or Of treating them NO "a 10 lead
up ~ a point, OF 10 make a complete pic.
turc or argument II he struck out good
sentence al the tlrst trial, 10 much the bet
ter; but hc could not repair or Improve Il
NJ rule. There was nothing dishonor-
able In our relation either 10 him or 10 me.
The work was labor Of love 10 me, and
hc appreciated this aud enjoyed seeing tho
book take different shape and color In my
hands, or rather, seeing his own thoughts
and deeds brought out more clearly &c
coring 10 his own idea.
But the book could not have becn made
what II IL without mo. There was no one
else who had both my peculiar knowledge
of the theme aud literary quality. There
wis no one clsc whom he would have al
lowsd 10 do what did, but hc knew how
loved him, md how devoted ! was 10 his
fame, and he trusted me. did my work
Loyalty II ever man did and never be-
tnlyed him. have done nothing Ia pre-
cipltatc this question. ! wouldn't have
told What ] am writing now II