Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1898-10-25
MR.. ROYAL TO SONS.
INTERESTING LECTURE AT LEE
CAMP HALL. LAST NIGHT.
CIVIL ADMINISTRATION ATTACKED.
The Speaker Says the Blame of Con-
fedcrate Defeat Must Rest Upon
Incompetent Civil OmciaIs-The
Right of Secession Forever Gone.


Mr.. William L. Royal. addressing r. /
Lee Camp OF the Sons Of Confederat
Veterans last night, made a remarkabl
speech. in that he made violent attacl
upon the civil administration Of the Con
federate Government, blaming It for the
defeat of the southern arms.
Mr.. Royals address was lengthy one
and evidently prepared with great care
as assertions were invariably accompanied
by authorities, and opinions were not de-
livered until the authorities had been
quoted.
Lee-Camp Hall was crowded with vete-
rams and Sons Of Veterans, and numbers
Of gentlemen not members Of the organi-
zation, as well as many ladies, especially
OF the younger generation. The address
was received with the closest attention
and occasionally there was ripple OF
applause. But it was clear that those
portions OF the address which declared
the doctrine of secession abrogated and
arraigned President Davis's admnistra-
ton. did not meet with unanimous APP
prevail.
Mr.. Royal was introduced by Past
| Commander Edwin =. Cox in very neat
speech, after prayer by the chaplain, Rev.
Mr. cook.
Mr. Royal announced as his theme,
"The Inspirations the Sons Of Confederate
Veterans Should Draw from the War"
which he considered under three heads,
as follows:
1. The question whether your fathers
had the right with them in the course
which they pursued between 1861 and 1875.
O. The course which you, their sons.
/ should pursue in all matters that are al
fected by the questions before them III
1861.
3. The way in which they demeaneI
| themselves in that period.
Mr.. ROYAL concisely argued the rignt
OF secession, and his able defence OF the
course of the South was frequently ap-
plauded. The question was argued with
ability, being discussed from historical
point of view, as well as from the view
of the reader of the Constitution alone.
RIGHT OF SECESSION GONE.
Under the second head, in which his
argument was divided, Mr.. Royal took
the ground that the question of secession
was forever settled. Secession was once
a living and a vital principle he saId;
lit is now dead and buried, and II mas
forever departed from the scenes as
principle that can affect the action ana
the conduct of men. The war was fought
on the question of the right OF secession
the question was decided against US To
say that the question remains the same
as IL was before adjudication would be
TO utter an absurdity." He argued that
the right was abrogated by the adoption
of the constitutions by each Of the South
ern states, reliquishing the right Of Sc
cession. Besides, the Constitution Of the
United States had been SO amended as 10
make secession no longer in accordance
with it.
CIVIL ADMINISTRATIONS RRAIGNbD
Mr.. Royal, in the latter part Of his
address. paid a splendid tribute to the
bravery and devotion of the Confederate
soldier. He said:
'No soldiers endured what they suffer
ed, and no soldiers ever fought upon the
field OF battle as they fought. But the
point 1 want 10 dwell on here tonight is
that they were not conquered by thelr
armed adversarles Oh, no. In contest
between them and other armed men, tney
were uncenquerable. They were conquer
ed by a foe that they could not contend
with They were conquered by munger
and cold, and the civil administration OF
the Confederate Government is culpably
responsible for their conquest.
las a Confederate soldier, and In JUS
tice 20 my comrades, / want TO make
that point here tonight: that II was not
he that lost the war, but those he de-
pended on TO supply him with what was
necessary for the war. He did ms DUTY
and if others had done theirs as he dld
his the Confederacy would nave won us
cause. But others upon whom rested the
responsibility Of providing him with food
and clothes, culpably failed TO perform
their duty, and left him no alternative
but to lay down his arms. l propose TO
show here tonight that the Confederate
soldier was not conquered, but that nc
was betrayed
II is common knowledge Of all men
that in the last year of the war General
Lees army had nothing to eat, no clothes
TO wear, and no tents to shelter II; II IS
like proving the multiplication table TO
cite witnesses of that to YOU but cam
not forbear to read a passage out OF old
Ben Buffers autobiography:
BUTLER'S TESTIMONY AS TO CoNDI-
TION.
speaking Of the conditions existing as
early as the summer of 1864, he says, |
at page 6lO:
"1n the matter Of starvation the TACT is |
incontestable that a soldier in our army
would have quite easily starved on the |
rations which in the latter days of the |
war were served out to the Confederate |
soldiers before Petersburg. / examined |
the haVersacks Of many Confederate sol |
diers captured on picket during the sum |
mer Of 1864 and found therein, as their |
ratiOns for three days, scarcely more |
than a pint of kernels of corn. none OF |
which were broken, but only parched to |
blackness by the fire. and a piece of meat, |
most frequently raw bacon, some three |
inches long by an inch and half wide, |
and less than half an inch thick. Now, |
no northern soldier could have lived three |
days upon that, and the lank, emaciated !
condition of the prisoner fully testified |
to the meagerness OF his means of SUBJ
sistence. . With regard TO cloth
ing. II was simply impossible for the
Confederates at that time and for many
months preceding to have any sufficient
clothing upon the bodies Of their soldiers,
and many passed the winter barefoot
This is familiar knowledge to every
body in the Southern States but il is
gratifying TO us TO find this hardened old
northern reprobate testifying in our be-
half in such unmistakable terms before