New-York tribune., 1902-06-18
LEE AND wAsHINGToN coMPARED.

LEE AND WASHINGTON COMPARED.
So thought and spoke and wrote and acted Robert
z. Lee in April 1861 He has for the decision thus
reached. been termed by some traitor. deserter
almost apostate. and consigned the "aveng-
ing pen of history" I cannot see it; con-
fdent posterity will not 50 il. The name and
conditions being changed. those who uttered the
words OF censure, invoking the avenging PEN did
not so it-have seen it Let appeal
the record. What otherwise did George Wash
ngton do under circumstances not dissimilar? What
would he have done under circumstances wholly
similar? Like Lee, Washington soldier; like
Lee he was a Virginian before he was a soldier
He had served under King Georges flag; he had
sworn allegiance 10 King George; his ambition had
been to hold the royal commission. Presently Vir-
ginia seeded from the British empire-renounced
its allegiance. What did Washington do? He
threw in his lot with his native province Do you
h0id him III then to hay SUBJ been n d1 haFe been
has not been the verdict Of history He acted con
scientiously, loyaly. as son OF Virginia. and &C,
o9Pding to his lights VIII you say that Lee did
But men love TO differentiated and of drawing of
distinctions there is end. The diff
fcrent. it will be argued: at the time Virginia
nounced its allegiance Washington did not hold
the Kings commission. indeed he held it. As
a soldier he was provincial always-he bore vir-
conceded; then assume that the darling wish OF his
he had receiTed the Kings Commission. t and heid i
it in i775-what course would he then have .pur
pursued? Do you not wishio you not know
he would have done exacy as Robert f. Lee ee did
eighty y-six years later? He would first have re-
signed his commission and then arrayed himself
on the side of Virginia. Would you have had him
do otherwise? And II goes in this world In
such the usual form OF speech is: OH that
IS different! Another altogether Yes ii is
different; 1t is another For II makes all the
difference in the world with who argues
thus. whether it is his that is gored that OF
the other mani
And here in preparing this address / must fairly
acknowledge having encountered obstacle in
my path also. When considering the OF
another. il Is always well to ask ones self the
question. What would You yourself have done If
similarly placed? Warmed by my argument, and
the great precedents of Lee and of Washington. L
did here. ] and mine and least q y
much identified with Massachusetts were Lee
and his with Virginia-traditionally. historically
by blood and memory and name. with the Puri-
tan Commonwealth as they with the Old Dominion.
What asked myself. would have done had
Massachusetts at any time arrayed itself against
the common country. though without my sympathy
and assent. Virginia arrayed itself against
the Union without the sympathy and assent OF
Lee IN 1851? The question gave me pause. And
then must confess to a sense of the humor OF the
situation coming over as l found II answered
TO my hand. The had already arisen, the
answer had been given; had IL been given any
uncertain tone The dark and disoyal days of the
earlier years Of the century just ended rose in