The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1903-01-11
FIVE GREATEST GENERALS.

Dr Newell Dwight Hills, who writes for
the magazines by virtue Of occupying-not
ng-Beecher's Plymouth pulpit has re-
Gently pronounced the worlds greatest Eve
generals 10 be Alexander the Great, julius
Caesar Oliver Cromwell, Napoleon Bona
parte and Ulysses S. Grant These Eve
and no more he adds economically
Two of the New York State papers have
been having quite debate over the mat
ter, the Troy Press championing and the
Poughkeepsie News.Press ridiculing the
reverend military critic The Poughkeepsio
paper says;
Couldn't We squts1e George Washington in
there, even ~ rhe cost Of seeming 10 differ with
the successor OF Beecher: II generals are meas
ured by their success and its benefits to the
world, George, II would seem 10 US ought TO
come In somewhere But all great generals did
net win A general may be great and fail
through = bad cause, Some very good Ameri-
cans still say that Robert L. Lee was truly
great bur his cause was lost. Englshmen think
well Of Wellington whatever the great Ma
polecn may have thought Of HIM We have read
somewhere that Frederick was great. and that
Won Moltke was SLOUGH. We shall not set
lie down 70 Or. Hills conclusion until we have
heard from Theodore Roosevelt on the subject
He has already suuGcd General Jackson out
like taper aud has made Miles look like a
messenger poY. Between all the critics, how
ever we trust that we shall he left more than
FIVE generals who may be called great without
serious danger 70 history.
Counting out General Lee, whom 1t could
hardly he expected Northern critics would
rank with Grant though this paper IS gen
erous enough to make mention of him. II I.
dtfhcalr to fathom the reasoning Of Or
Hills in ignoring Washington. His great
ness as man and executive does NOT dim
bis greatness as a military chieftau. and
certainly the successes OF Grant with bis
overwhelming legions moving against the
battered Confederates is not compsrabl Ia
Waehingtop's wonderful maneuverlnE With
his ragged coutinentsls Or Hills must be
counting greatness b. the number Of on.
sagements won Other military critics
count mastery retreats as equal 10 vic.
torious advances aud It was this that made
Washington great and won the American
revolution. BY the same reasoning Jack.
son is entitled to high rank and for endur.
apce General Lee must be written down
with the greatest Of earth. But Washing.
ton exhibited both talents and besides he
finally succeeded Hence while history may
refuse TO recognize the ability of these
Southern generals because they did not
make a nation, it Is bound to put Washing
ton above Grant
It is not quite clear either b. what reck.
oning Cromwell is given one Of the FIVE
places He was q remarkable man. He
reyolutlonized England and subdued Ire.
land, but his military achievements were
small compared with a score of men even
OF his own times. Az best he was a cru.
sader fred by religious zeal and battling
against rotten royalty which had little
heart In its cause, William the Conqueror
was a more mastertul general and William
of Orange had performed greater feats be.
fore he was invited to the English throne.