The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1901-05-16
CIVIL WAR INCIDENT
Of Special Interest to the Citizens of
Garrett County.
The Capture of Generals Crook and Kelley
Northumberland During the Civil War
is Recalled.

is Recalled.
The following letter was written by
Mr.. Henry p. Goddard, of Baltimore,
to the Springfield Mass Republican,:
I'm a recent issue you quoted a
letter sent to the Chicago Record
Herald by a man at Leayenworth,
Kansas, which alluded to the we'll
known story of the capture of Gems.
George r. Crook and Kelley during
the latter part of the Civil War by
company of Confederate soldiers, who
dashed into Cumberland, Md, one
night and took these officers from
their beds at hotel. The writer is
quoted as saying: 1T was deed of
daring bravery, well planned and
ably executed. But when Gen. Robt.
+. Lee heard of it he ordered the pris-
oners sent back to our lines, saying
that he did not approve of this style
OF warfare. He did not consider it
honorable"
Ever since | read this statement
in the Republican | have been trying
to get at the facts in the case, as Il
was and am convinced that this state
ment as to the action of General Lee
was untrue. had frequently heard
the story of the capture and knew
that it was planned by young Con-
federate soldier named DALEY, to
whose sister General Crook was very
devoted land later married) and to
whom am told by her living sister,
Mrs. Matthew MARYLAND, of Oakland.
Md, General Crook becomes engaged
the evening before his capture, she
| then residing at Cumberland. | have
always understood that young Daley,
who was somewhat of a daredevil,
thought it would be brilliant exploit
for himself and good Joke on his
sister to carry off her lover into the
Confederate lines. The exploit was
brilliant one, and executed with dar-
ing and success, although the small
| number of Confederates (under com
mand of Captain Daley were aided
by intense darkness and severe rain
storm prevailing at the time. ] have
always understood that General
Crook was exchanged very soon after
his capture, but until saw the state
ment in the Republican never heard
that General Lee disapproved the
capture and can see no earthly reason
why he should have done so, although
/ have recently found one or two old
soldiers who have vague recollection
of having heard some such story.
After reading the Republican |
wrote to Mrs. MARYLAND, who replies
under date of April IA that as she did
not wish to trust to her memory in re-
gard to the matter, having no date ny
her, she wrote to Judge Thayer Mel
vim, of the U. s. Court at Wheeling,
w. Va, who was captured and taken
to Libby prison with Gems. Crook and
| Kelley, being at the time member
of General Kelley's staff. She adds
that Gen. Crook at once upon his re-
turn from Richmond rejoined her sis
ter at Cumberland, which was and
had been within the Federal lines at
the time of his capture. She encloses
me the reply of Judge Melvin to her
request for information upon the sub
ject. Under date of April - he writes
her:
8 1 regret that | am not able to
give definite information concerning
the exchange of Gems. Crook and Kel-
ley. The records | never saw, and
they are probably unavailable; and
while doubtless / have had talks with
both, the knowledge thus obtained
has very largely faded with the years.
/" These officers, with myself and
others held in Libby. were paroled
for exchange in March, 1866, they be-
ing directed to report to Gen. Grant,
at City Point; this, as was understood
at his instance, he desiring to confer
with Gen. Crook, perhaps; somehow
or other | was included, being on the
staff of one of these officers. We re-
manned there for night and part of
a day and were given leaves of absence
pending exchange. Certainly Gen.
Kelley and myself were so given
leaves, but am not so certain as to
General Crook. 1t is possible that he
was exchanged at once, but my rec
election is otherwise. But my dis
tinct impression is that Gen. Grant
Continued on Fifth Page. Sixth Column.