Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1902-04-14
GEN. LEE AT APPoMATTox..
.s.##+***.a*+%**+*++++%++4+e

Gen. E. p. Alexander, who was one OF
the most distinguished artillery command
ers in the Confederate service and since
the civil war has been eminent in railroad
management. has in Century Magazine an
article on General Lee at Appomattox,
which is sure to provoke a considerable
amount of discussion.
1t has already called forth several re-
plies, among which is one from The Rich
mond Times that is likely to be followed
by a rejoindeP from General Alexander.
That gentleman relatss from memory
conversation he had with General Lee on
the night before the surrender, when the
question as to whether it would be better
to make a formal surrender of the army
or let it disband and scatter as 1t pleased.
L General Alexander was requested to give
his views, which he did, strongly advocat-
ing the latter plan.
General Lee differed emphatically from
General Alexander who, in his reply said,
among other things:'
Now If I should adopt your suggestion
and order this army to disperse the men,
going homeward, would be under no con-
troll; and moreover, would be without
food. They are already demoraiized by
four years of war. and would supply their
wants by violence and plumber. They
would soon become little better than
bands of robbers"
The Richmond Times cannot believe that
General Alexander's memory has served
him faithfully as to what General Lee
said on that occasion. 1t comments as
follows on the remarks attributed TO
General Lee:
Is it possible that Lee thus referred to
the officers and men of whom he spoke so
tenderly in the farewell address he issued
to them next day? y
Now remember that in the use of lam
guage Lee was one of the most careful
men that ever lived. His control over
his tongue was wonderful, and the fact
has been remarked upon by many care
full observers To us it is inconceivable
that Lee ever could have thought his men
would have turned robbers under any
circumstances And even if any such
thought had flashed through his mind
for a moment-which, we think, would
have been veryS improbable, indeed-he
wasn't the man to blurt it out; no; not
even to General Alexander. who was a
trusty and able lieutenant, and much be-
loved by Lee.
LAS we have said Lee was astonishly
prudent in his speech, and few. indeed,
were the slips of his tongue. But let us
not be understood as questioning the
veracity of General Alexander. No, in
deed; not for the world would we do
that; but We think his memory is at
fault. We have quoted only few lines
of General Alexander's report Of Lees
feIndrkSs DuI Iney are EXTENDED over HdAA
a column of the Century Magazine and
are placed within quotation marks, indl-
eating that they are Lees own words.
There, we believe, General Alexander
errs. His memory has played a trick
upon him. We cannot see how Lee
could have used those words. We all
have had like experiences. To repeat an
others worGs after the lapse of a day is
difficult enough. How much more diff
cut it is to repeat them after the lapse
Of many, many years!
Lees reason for surrendering were
sound enough without the use Of any
such argument as that which we ques-
ton. The farewell address prepared by
Colonel Charles Marshall, at the instance
Of Lee states the case as 1t should be
stated. we think"
The words, which The Times thinks
must have been misquoted through some
slip of General Alexander's memory. GER
tainly do not sound Ike Robert E. Lee.
1t has been long time since that sad
night when General Lee realized and adj
mitted finally that his duty was to pro-
long the struggle no further and the MEM
DRY of man is not infallible.