Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1898-09-10
THE HISTORY OF THE WAR.
Is IL Thoroughly Impartial in Its
Statement of Facts!

Statement of Facts!
To the Editor of the Washington Times:
In your issue of August I'D (evening)
there is an editorial article or report on
the Government History of the Great
Civil War" You comment on many in
teresting features-its great extent and
enormous cOst-coupled with the remark
that it is worth the money or words to
that effect; that both sides In the civil
war have free representation In its pages,
and when completed that it will be a work
which the whole nation can contemplate
with pride and honor.
Now, is it really fact that both sides"
are fully and impartially represented in
these records OF the war? In truth, are
they not almost wholly a Union history
of the war? There Is a good deal of doubt
in some quarters If they give all the re-
cords, or in some cases even an intelligi-
BILE portion Of them. In two instances /
can demonstrate that for some reason un-
known gross injustice has been done the
"other side" by the suppression of valu-
able documents known to be in existence
and probably to-day on file in the govern
ment archives.
! refer to the tyrannical arrest OF the
Baltimore Police Commissioners ana
Chief Of Police George p. Kane on July
/, 1861, the official account of which ap-
pears in Volume IL, from pages l3S TO l56
inclusive. 1t is an entirely one-slded his
tory of that unjustifable act, supposed to
have originated with William VI. Seward,
wholly from the standpoint of the Union
authorities When the House by resolu-
ton asked the President for 1.-THE grounds
the reason, and evidence" upon which
these men were thrust into Fort Nc
Henry, Mr.. Lincoln replied that II was
Judged to be incompatible with the pub
lie interest at this time to furnish the
information called for" Nor was the in
formation ever furnished the public or
the House at that or any subsequent
date.
Moreover, a careful search through all
the III volumes of this unbiased history
Of both sides of the civil war fails to
develop the information sought by the
House of Representatives thirty-seven
years ago. More extraordinary still, the
vast collection is strangely silent upon
the vital point If these prisoners, so cru
ely torn from their homes, were ever re-
leased from Fort McHenry. So far as
this luminous history Of both sides Is
concerned, the world might suppose Mr..
Stewards prisoners were still rOtting in
the old fort out in the harbor. No order
for their release can be discovered. nor
is there any correspondence showing that
they were ever set at liberty, or tried
for their alleged crimes. Now, what sort
of a history of both sides" Is this? Me-
thinks the Times must reconsider its
statements on this head.
/ can cite more fragrant instance, II
that were possible, where great injustice
is done to a number Of distinguished citi-
zens of Maryland, charged with sympa-
thizing with the South. L refer TO the
arrest of "disloyaT members of the
Maryland Legislature and others, which
took place on the 18th OF September, 1861,
among them the Hon. II. May, member
OF Congress at the time; Hon. S. r. Wal
lis. T. Parkin Scott. Henry NJ. Varied,
and others Of equal prominence. The
historical account Of these arrests Is
found on pages 193-1g7, Volume ", OF this
history Of both sides. 1t therein appears
that these people were first sent to Fort
McHenry by order of General Dix, or
shoot acknowledged" fame, and within
few days TO Fort Monroe, and from
there they were sent by General Wool to
Fort Lafayette, New York harbor. There
so far as this exhaustive history of IL
volumes Is concerned, these victims or
somebody's malice totally disappear from
the public knowledge. There is not a
scrap Of official records showing what was
the eventual fate of these leading citi-
zens of Maryland; whether they were ever
tried and condemned whether they were
eXonerated and released; whether they
died in prison or are still immured in the
classmates of Fort Lafayette is a tale UNI
told in this great impartial work which
the Times lauds as giving all the records
OF the war on both sides.
Two or three years ago there was
printed in the Sun, of this city; I'm the
Richmond papers, and all over the South
protests against the proposed suppress
sion Of any portion Of the official records
Of the war, l reckon from the foregoing
that the suppression or systematic omls
sion of certain of the records was then
no new proposition or practice. 1t began |
with the very first volume issued. and
has continued to the end.
There is still 'sore" place in Mary |
and because of those unjustifable ar |
rests. There was always a mystery about |
them. which II has long been hoped |
would be cleared up in the Official records |
Of the late war. Nobody ever owned I'D |
10 the shameful infamy OF having or |
tered them. General Mcclellan was |
charged with 1t. but when he was before |
he Chicago convention In 1854 his friends |
FASTENED TO deny his completely with or |
of the arrests. IL seq
hat an event of such Importance SHOULD |
nave been fully exploited In these costly |
md exhaustive tones, and the full truth |
infolded to the world. Why should only
/ party OF the story OF these arrests be |
old2 A p SCOTT
Baltimore