Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1892-12-11
CAPTAIN JOHN SMITH.
Is He Worthy of SIonument'-A Reply
TO an Director.
To he Editor Of the Dispatch:

To he Editor of he Dispatch:
In your issue Of the 9th OF November
there appeared q communication signed
/" salts S,iDerque,n attacking Captain John
Smith and the proposal 70 erect monu-
ment TO him. The author is easily recog-
niZed through his Latin veil-as easily, IN
deed. as was the verdant youth he tells US
of who adopted as his motto, Eg0 ddm-
nus sfiiltis sum- The author has chosen
an apt ggnature-one which suffering
public has long since thought applicable
to his violent and unJusthaole attacks
upon one of the great historic characters
of Virginia. 1t seems to be the object OF
vour correspondent TO lGud to the skies
the founders of Nirginla-London Com
pany and colonists-except Captain John
Smith. IL il a fact known to beginners in
Virginia history, and, OF course, TO your
correspondent, that there were Nlo-
lent dlssensions ana Oltter GUAR
rels both in the London Company
and in the colony at Jamestown;
and perhaps the severest arrangement OF
the London Company that was ever made
is found in a paper issued By the Virginia
colony through its House of Burgesses, II
/ mistake not. In these quarrels each party
denounced the other as unworthy men.
1t is impossible. therefore, leaving out
Captain John Smith, that all were worthy
posing it simply makes himself ridiculous.
four CORRESPONDENT, who seems to con-
slder himself az the guardian OF the III
FAINT colony. will never be able TO solve the
difficulty of deifying two bodies OF men
0uarrelling among themselves like Kilken-
nv cats. liz It were indeed possible, your
Correspondent would be utterly unit to
undertake the task. He could not write
on early Virginia history without railing
into beratlng Captain Smith, and supordl-
mating all else to bis antl-Smlth passion.
His Communication demonstrates his
inability to do Smith justice. In his IN
famed eve the incidents in Smiths lie be-
come strangely perverted. When Smiths
term as president of the Virginia Council
had expired and presidents were no longer
elected in Virginia, but governors were ap-
pointed in England, he claims that smith
was removed from Office. When smith
warns the latter colony In New England
against the mistakes OF the London Com
many which had caused its dissolution and
so much suffering in Virginia, he sees IN
the warning o publication sectional In Its
character-an arraying of the North
against the South. Smiths writings. IN
Guiding his histories based upon cited au-
thorities he describes as "laudiDg himself,
which is always his first motive. and to dis.
parace Others, which 10 always his second
Truly "S1tis supTq,le." Smith undoubtedly
had strong convictions and believed firmly
in his conclusions, and he may have been
little proud of his achievements. But are
these sufficient grounds for his ostracisrn
from the company OF historians * so,
his enemy, your correspondent, mey nave
to accompany him..
Had / the leisure | would like to trace
the careers of Smiths bitterest enemies IN
the colony. / am much mistaken II they
or nearly ell of them-did not prove to DO
unworthy characters, and wero SO esti-
mated BY tho London Company.
Az REyoIs.