Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1903-03-18
THE R. E. LEE STATUE
MIR. EVERETT REPLIES TO THE
CRITISIsMs OF MR.. SYPHERD.
A Federal Veteran Cites Dates Of the
Phases of the South's
Secession.
To the Editor Of The Evening Star:

To the Editor Of The Evening Star:
This discussion of the proposed statue Of
General R. E. Lee has already assumed
undue proportions. But inasmuch as the
voluminous treatise by a Mr.. Sypherd In
your issue of the 10th instant takes in large
part the form of q personal attack upon
myself 1 ask The Star for an opportunity
for a reply. His letter was so splendtdly
answered in advance by that of the gallant
old soldier in blue which appeared just
above it that little need be added here. But
let us look at two or three points attempted
to be made. He admits that Lee, "as repre-
senting the south, was a party to the COM
pact which formed the Union" He thus
gets in the way of such anti-secessionists
as Daniel Webster, who contended that
there was no compact, because II there were
then it could be rescinded and that the
converse Of a contractual union was seces-
sion. Our friend attempts to deny the fact
that Lee did distinctly draw his sword to
defend Virginias sacred soil against In
vasion-as no loyal Virginian" or true pa
triot could refuse to do, since defense
against invasion is universally recognized
as the imperative duty Of every able-bodied
male citizen. Any authentic history will
tell Mr. Sypherd that Virginia did not Sc
cede until Mr.. Lincoln had called for volun-
teers to invade the southern states, and
troops were pOuIiuS ooWH AAoiii eiO iioA IA
for that purpose. Then she withdrew,
which, to paraphrase our friend, ANY other
self-respecting" state would have done UNI
der the circumstances. She thus identified
herself with the states to the south of her
and invited the impending invasion first
against herself. Then 1t was that the out
posts of Virginia's forces encamped as our
friend says, in plain sight of the dome OF
the United States Capitol, but only after
the armed legions of the invading north
had encamped in plain sight of her own
shores.
Again, our friend "as a Virginian, ut
terly scouts the idea that Robert E. Lee
ever rendered any honorable or useful serv-
ice to the state of Virginia." and denies
that, in the service of the United States
during the Mexican war, "he did any more
than twenty other majors and colonies That
could be named" He thus cruelty blasts
the military reputation of General Scott,
who designated Lee as his logical successor
in command Of the army. He thus dis
credits the judgment Of Abraham Lincoln.
who offered Lee this same chief command
IL he would side with the north against
Virginia.
I feel impelled to add a word in defense
of the gallant old northern soldiers whom
our friend so cruelty maligns. speak OF the
actual fighters, of the men who marched
to the front and gave themselves chance
to test at close range the temper of the
southrons' steel, not Of the invisible but
very audible stay-at-home patriots and
that had the northern soldiers foreseen that
during their lifetime the boys in gray would
receive like honor and consideration with
themselves at the hands of the nation not
one would have marched to the front, that
the American people would have gone
smash we Anglo-Saxons would have lost
our 2,OOO-year-old capacity. for self-govern-
ment and the new world affairs would have
gone to the dogs generally. AS a matter of
fact most Of the men who actually fought
for the north did 50 from pure patriotism.
as they understood it, and not for the flesh
pots Of patronage and pensions. Or, to put
It another way, they thought so much Of
our frienu fellow Virginians and fellow
southerners that they felt constrained to
keep hold OF them at all costs, and now
that these old foemen of theirs have ac-
cepted in good faith the issue Of the strug-
gle and made the best OF a bad bargain
they are brave enough and true enough to
be willing to share with them the benefits
of what they regard as their common coun-
try. L. 7. EVERETT.