The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1902-06-20

from that Of Lee eight -t1vc years 1ater?s
That there were differences Is true, but
logically Mr.. Adams would Seem to think
that they do seriously affect the situation.
Moreover, though washington did not
hold the Kings commission, he ardently
desired to hold it prior to the Revolntion.
Suppose, then. that his wish had been
gratifed; would anybody at the present
time Mr.. Adams asks, have had him do.
otherwise than as he actually did, and
as unquestionaoly he would have done
in any case?
Again, was the constitutional, union Of
the States a dissoluble compact? We
know now that it was tndissoluble, Or
at least that the Civil! War made it So.
But in general those by whom 1T was
ratified did not doubt that it might be
dissolved, though the amazing sagacity
OF Washington and perhaps Of lew
others enabled him to discern that the
withdrawal OF a State would not sbe IN
accompanied by practical difficulty. Lee
loved the Union, but other great Virgin
ians loved it with a different result. Mr..
Adams thus cites General Scott and Cen
eral Thomas, but only to point out that
Scott had not lived in his native State for
forty years, was not planter, owned no
slaves and was essentially soldier and
O. citizen of the United States. while
Thomas was not of the old virginia
stock, had lived almost everywhere but
In Virginia during the twenty-one years
in which he had held his commission, mad
q. Now York woman for a wife. and was
mora at home on the Hudson than on
the Nottoway In the case OF Lee hered-
ity and environment exercised stupen-
dous influence. He was a virg1man or
the Virginians in every fibre OF his being.
And SO, when Virginia, not quickly and
impulsively. but after long delay and hes
itation, and then only In denial OF the
right of coercion, seeded from the Union,
Lee went out with his State. It cannot
be denied that Mr. Adams plea in ex-
planation-not quite in justifcation-of
that momentous decision is not merely
benevolent, but powerful-not less so be-
cause. having frankly questioned what
he might himeslf have done under like
circumstances, he expressed the belief
that, following the example Of John quincy
Adams, he would have confirmed once
more the doctrine of heredity, stood Tor
the common country as against his sec
ton and accepted the obloquy which fell
upon his illustrious ancestor. 1t must be
borne in mind that, when due and just
allowance has been made for motives
and while, as Golden said, sympathy for
other rebels than our own Is common
among mankind, the event does never
theless to q great extent or necessity oil
rect the verdict. According to the prac-
teal Judgment of nations, successful
rebellion is right and an unsuccessful
rebellion is wrong; and those whose fore
cast, like that of Washington, is verified
can fairly claim that their superior dis
cernment shall be reckoned as virtue
in fixing the standard Of their conduct
Furthermore. Washington fought gladly
for a cause which he ardently approved.
Lee fought regretfully for a cause Which
he hesitated to embrace.
AS to the purity OF General Lees mo-
tives, the nobility OF his character and
his commanding abilities, contemporary
opinion was seldom at fault and posterity
entertains no doubt whatsoever. In max
ing the foundations of that sympathetic
judgment stiil more firm. and inviting ms
countrymen to put an even higher estl-
mate on his moral qualities, Mr.. Adams
has performed q generous and useful SER
vice II there were no other reason to
cherish the memory Of Lee, his decisive
refusal to sanction guerilla warfare at
ter Appomattox and his loyal acceptance
of the issue Of the titanic combat Which
saved the Union would entitle him to
secure place among great Americans.