The National tribune., 1891-11-19


a few years ago by erecting a costly mOnu-
ment to Maj. Andre, who was caught play
ing the spy within our lines during the
Revolution, tried by a court-martial ordered
by Washington, found guilty according to
the laws Of war, and very properly hanged.
There was nothing to make him different
from other spies, except that he was caught
with the proofs Of his guilt upon him, which
they are generally too smart TO allow, and
that he was handsome young fellow who
had been much petted in the Tory society
Of New York and Philadelphia. Further,
if his spying and intriguing had been sue
cessful, as they came perilously near being
it would have resulted in the downfall Of
the cause Of American independence.
There was thus absolutely no reason why
any American citizen should care to honor
him, but the reverse. 1t was wen enough
for Englishmen to lament his iate-though
the truth is not one Englishman in 10000
has the slightest idea that there ever was
such a man. Why an American should
want TO raise a monument 10 him is past
finding out. The only rational explanation
is that Cyrus w. Field thought such an
act might bring him TO the favorable
notice Of Queen Victoria, and help open his
way into high English society. 1T was
forcibly pointed out at the time that if he
was possessed with the idea Of building a
monument TO an executed spy, be could
have found n much better subject in the
patriotic young Nathan hale, who under
took spy's duty from the noblest motives,
and died lamentng that lac had but one life
to give for his country.
Now, another brother, the Rev. Henry NJ.
Field-a divine of National reputation-has
done an equally unaccountable thing in
writing eulogistic biography Of Stonewall
Jackson, which 10 published, with album
dance Of fine illustrations, in Hapers M0ga-
zine for November. AS "there is 10 Turk
like a renegade" so even the rebel biogra-
pliers are distanced by the fulsome adulation
Of this Northern divine. Before he is well
into his third paragraph he discovers that
his hero "outdid even Napoleon himself"
in the Napoleonic attributes Of secrecy Of
design and rapidity Of execution" "As a
soldier, some competent critics pronounce
him the first that the war produced on either
side" This is rank nonsense. The more
the history Of the war is studied, the less
reason viii there appear to be for the ex-
travagant praises which rebel writers and
their Northern copyists lavish on Stonewall
Jackson. That he was a skilful, enterprising
leader an win admit, but this kind Of leaders
were pretty plentiful both North and South.
Jackson made most OF his reputation in the
Shenandoah Valley, where we had four or
FIVE commanders Of independent armies, all
apparently jealous Of each other, and play
ing at cross purposes. He proceeded on the
correct military principle Of opposing
masses to fractions" But he did not have il
all his own way by any means. Whenever
the Union forces were anywhere near his
own strength he got eo1n6ly thrashed
From first to last he got whipt oltener
than other General in the rebel army, and
some Of his defeats were very discreditable
to him. In fact, be did not gain a single
tactical victory in his famous Shenandoah
campaign. Returning 10 Lees army, be led
10000 men against the Fifth Corps and one
division Of The Sixth, numbering 10000 al
together, at Gaines's Mills, aud in spite Of
his overwhelming numbers barely succeeded
in forcing the Union soldiers 70 retreat At
Malvern Hill he made laundering attack
on our right which resulted in a terrible
slaughter Of lis men. At the second Ball
Run he was only saved from destruction by
the laundering Of several Of our command
ers and the rapdity with which Longstreet
marched TO his relief At Harper'g Ferry
the drunken and incapable Miles gave him
most undeseryed victory. At Chaucel-
louisville he placed himself in a position that
invited destruction, but we had no com
mander capable Of taking advantage Of the
opportunity. 1t was Jackson's singular good
fortune 10 strike the most astonishing array
Of incompetents and series Of blunders in our
whole war. lie never happened 10 encoun.
ter any really frst-class opponent Such
men as Sheridan or Hancock, Sedgwick Of
Logan, TO say nothing Of Grant, Sherman
Thomas, or Rosecrans, would have used him
mp completely, if encountered on anything
: like equal terms.
Dr. Fields article abounds in the mos
absurd misstatements. Speaking Of th,
{ Shenandoah campaign Of 1862, he says:
c lie pitted not against one army but fou
d luudcr Banks, Fremont, Shields, and MIlroy), ad
vancng upon him from different quarters. Ant
D outmanuveTed thcm al, attacking and defeating
n each ia turn tiH lac drove them one after another
out Of The Valley, when he gave them All tie slf
q aud crossing the Blue Ridge 10 one 81 hs rRpi,