New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1896-03-18
LONGSTREET'S MEMOIRS.
COMMENTARIES ON THE CAMPAIGNS
UNDER GENERAL LEE.

FROM MANASSAS TO APPOMATTOH Memoirs
Of the civil War in America BY James a lony
ffrrv with Plates. Maps. Portraits and
Engrayings specially Prepared for this WORK;
Pr xii. GO. Philadelphia: J. b. Lppi'oo''
Company.
The difficulties of writing war history are Illus
trated by a single brief paragraph in General
Yongstreets account Of the battle OF Antietam.
About noon on the second day Of that CONNECT
charge was made by some troops OF the Oiilo"
Sixth Corps. General Longstreet says; Inc
Third Brigade Of the Second DVisioh' "iA'i
Corps made erratic march across part Oh '''e
field the 7th Maine Regiment leading. ana reVi7u
like a meteor that loses it's own fire. Hehei'i
Iongstreet is not to blame. Most historians nave
spoken in much the same terms that ne use'
7, ,ooks nrobable on the face Of it that nothing
smaller than a brigade would have atteihp'eu ~
advance upon an enemy's line in a storm OF
musketry and artillery fire. Nevertheiess' 'He
alusion TO the Third Brigade is pure legend
What hammered was due TO the perturbatiohs
Of a German battery officer and the wilfulness
Of a brigade comma nder. The artilleryman vas
ANNOYED by some Confederate rifiemen VINO ""'c
picking off his gunneis He Appeared 10 INC
brigader and the latter turned TO the hedieo'
body Of troops. which happened 10 De the ''i
Maine Regiment. and ordered charge i"e
rsh., riAemen were we'll sheltered. and there was
No sign of a break or en- OF weakness III ''e
Confederate line. Major Hyde. commanding '"e
regiment demurred against movement WHY"
thrsatened the destruction of all his men. The
regiment had already suffered enough anu "u,''-
hared onlv q little over two hundred men, the
brigadier insisted and when he demahueu ~
know II Major Hyde refused, the latter replieu:
.,v,au ,vo the order so the men can hear It,
Tho order was given. the men marched 10 certain
dsatb Almost before they had cleared the
Union line some of them were killed by the III
describable fool of an artieryman whoh tnes
were expected to defend and that hieh' al ',A'
was left Of the regiment could nave c'eP' UNI
a couple of blankets 1t was pluhue' "S i"'"'
q charge as heroic. as those at baiah'".a' on"
tho Interest irony IF II all Is that hooou' e'e'
tells the story of 1t right.
General Longstreet's literary plan ih'o'eS
Ao,ored history of every battle in which ne
participated. 1t thus, In scope at ras''
little of being a complete review or the cam
r tn virginia with an interval from the
date Of the Chickamauga campaign 70 tha' Oh
Tho hattie of the Wilderness. when the author
was attempting to demonstrate In tennessee
the value of the interior lines occupied py the
Confederacy But as the main object OF the
uork Is frankly controversial, ii would nave
been vastly more effective If those portions
which are general had been strictly supor-
dinated to the personal narrative Iheh every
point on which General Longstreet diners from
his literary adversaries. most OF whom were Ills
COMPANIONS In arms, would have been pain 10
the reader AS it is. many Of them must escape
attention until renewed criticism brings them
into prominence.
The impression is given that the book might
never have been written If General Lee had
carried out his purpose OF writing work on
the campaigns Of the Army OF Northern Nir-
rinia General I1ongstreet did what he could
20 further the historical plans Of General Lee
bv supplying reports. dispatches and letters
where the originals had been lost or destroyed.
General Lee meant to be deliberate. Il shall
be In no hurry in publishing" he wrote 10 Gen.
eral I.ongstreet in 1866. land will not do so un-
til feel satisfied that have got the true story
as my only object is TO disseminate the tru'h'
] am very sorry TO hear that your RECORDS were
DESTROYED too; but l hope Sorrel and Latrooe
will be able TO supply you with all you require
wish TO relate the acts Of all the corps OF the
Army Of Northern Virginia wherever they ala
duty and do not wish TO omit so important one
az YOURS" Somewhat later he urged General
Longstreet to prepare volume OF memoirs But
the latter is pleased to think that circumstances
caused him &c put off for thirty years what ne
might have done IN the times Immediately
after the war He insists that his views as TO
the struggle are still those which he held in
the sixties or at least that he could then have
taken the view Of 1t which he takes now. But
ne NAV be oversanguine in believing that
NOW more fully than then the public Is READY
TO receive. In the spirit in which II Is written,
the story which he presents. Apparently hiA
book has only aroused anew the old Confeder-
ate rivaries and disputes, particularly those
which centre about the battle of Gettysburg.
General Longstreet claims that his military acts
met only commentator from Southern critics
until he happened to express views which awak-
ened their political prejudices. In the days Of
Reconstruction he ventured to suggest that the
Southern States particularly Louisiana. In which
he resided would hasten the of prosperity by
complying with the demand Of Congress and CIV
ing constitutional guarantee Of negro suffrage.
He was forthwith denounced traitor and a
deserter up TO that time" he adds. the First
Corps. his command in the Army of Northern Vir-
gin!a "in all its parts in all Of Its history, was
above reproach." But, after General Lees death,
various writer's the Southern cause combined
with one accord to hold the First Corps and It's
commander responsible for all the adversely that
befell the army" The points on which General
Longstreet Is at odds with Southern military
critics are perhaps more numerous than the
battles and movements which he describes. but
the majority Of readers will pay most attention
TO the Gettysburg campaign and 10 the General s
separate campaign in Tennessee. 1t Is in refer
ence to the Gettysburg campaign that General
Longstreet becomes explicit in his censurc OF
Lees conduct as commander. Up to that time
he alludes occasionally to what he thinks were
errors in the Confederate cheftans tactics or
strategy but in view of Gettysburg he presents
n case which, II accepted will force upon Lees
memory the verdict historically Of mental failure
at crisis. He evidently never considered Lee q
master in handling troops on the field.
His narrative of what happened when he HIM
self was wounded in the Battle of the Wilderness