The Lafayette gazette., 1902-07-05
Lee, FarraEut, aud Thomas.

There are men still surviving who find
pleasure in discussing the questions involved
in the civil war and the conduct Of certain
,t the most en- riCuous actors III that i'm
mortal tragedy. NJ long ago. cores
pondcnt of the New York Tribune, signing
himself Justice" undertook to throw new
light upon the incident, and, among other
things, said:
..If Gen. Lee is 20 be held wholly blame
less for his action, what judgment is to be
passed on George If. Thomas and David 6.
Farragut, both Nirgirians like himself but
who, finding no grievance and no moral
grounds for rebellion, took what l believe
history will consider the higher and broader
view, that, educated they had been and
as Lee had been, having been all their lives
in the pay Of the nation, and especially
oathbound to stand 10y it in all emergencies,
to ii their first and controlling allegiance
was due?'
Now, as a matter of fact, the question of
the right of secession had not been settled
in 1861 1t was, on the contrary, an open
question, with the burden of authority in
favor of the right. Certainly student
of the history of this republic. familiar with
the Circumst under which the Union
was created, ami the acts and opinions
of Adams, Jefferson, Hamilton, and others
who were prominent in the work-certainly
no such person can imag gine that the founders
regarded the adoption of the Constitution
irrevocable Or considered! that any citizen
could entertain any allegiance above that
which he owed t" his own State. MIR. Ham
ilton may have cherished such idea, but
Mr.. Hamilton, was not an American.
Unquestonably. MIR. Adams held Mas
sachuset:s FIRST did MIR. Jefferson in the
case of Virginia. The issue a perfectly
legitimate one in 1901. 1t was not def
nitely settled until four years later.
This Tribune correspondent, 81 Justice,'
employs very Vulgar well very
ignorant argument when he lays stress on
the circumstance that Robert r. Lee had
been all his life in the pay of the nation.
Suppose he had been; did he not render
faithful service as long he took the pay?
Besides, since when has it been dishonor-
able in an officer to resign from service
which he has come to regard distaste
All tins talk about the Southern officers
nonsensical The Southern States
contributing their full quota to the general
treasury during the years referred TO. if
those gentlemen were paid out of the national
fund, it was Southern money they got. a
reference to the statistics of that time will
show, think, that the South was paying
its way very handsomely, and that it owed
nothing To the North for any advantage i,
enjoyed under the Union.
Farragut and Thomas exercised an
undoubtcd rshr in casting their respective
lots with the Union. Neither was a repre-
sentative SOutherner in any Imperative anl
conspicuous way. Neither under half
even one tenth of the obligations the
people of his native State. its spirit and
its tradition, that influenced Lee in his de
cision. And We venture to say that Lee
transferred his allegiance from the nation to
Virginia through motives quite as honorable
those which actuatcd Farragut or
Thomas. Faragut, 10y the way, not
a Nirginan at all. lie was i Ten"esseean, n,
and from the eastern end Of the State, which
remained loyal To the Union throughout the
war. That is neither here nor there. Of
course. 1t illustrates the careless methods
of such wranslers as ''luslice,' hu, j,
amounts t" nothing either way.
One thought occurs TO in this connec-
ton, however, and we make bold to- give it
utterance. We under the impression
that the fighting men. North and South.
settled the question of secession nearly forty
years ago, and it seems t. us, such being the
case, that the gentlemen who didn't DO any
the matter rest.