Staunton spectator and vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1896-1916, 1904-10-28
Gen. ROsser and Gen Tom Munford.

1
Rosser contemptuously said it was
"Munford assemblage" CharIottel
vile Progress reporter gives the TO
lowing statement from Gen. Rosse
touching Gen. Munford.
"CoI. MunfOrd began the war a
Lieutenant Colonel of the Second Wiz
ginia Cavalry and at the close of tn
war be had only risen one file and cam
out OF the war as Colonel of the Secont
Virginia Cavalry. While command
ing my division and Fitzhugh Lee g di
vision of the cavalry, l was short oil
brigadiers and had Geueral W. H
T iyne promoted, as he was the best
man had. This greatly offended Col
MunfOrd and his-friends and was ap.
pealed to by them to recommend Nun.
ford instead of Payne. The latter
commission was held up in Richmond
until could be heard from, but Payne
being a very superior man to Munford
and low on the list of coloneIs, could
only make use of Payne's talent by
promoting him, because he was out
ranked by other colOnels in the com.
mand.
."Munford, being senior colonel In
The cavalry service, whatever talents
be possessed we're always available.
"Munford never forgave me for this
act. His insubordination and his want
OF cooperation when l was preparing
for the expedition to Beverly, VIVA
made it necessary for me to put him
under arrest and have him court mar
tailed. Hence can readily see why he
should not want me at banquet where
be was parading under a borrowed uni
form.
"MunfOrd was an old colonel when |
| was transferred to the cavalry. He |
had served with Jackson, Stuart and
Lee and If they had not promoted him
don't see why he should have blamed |
me for bis not having received com.
mission"
The trouble between General Rosser l
and General --Munford, found its way |
into the,Epublic prints something like
twenty years ago, when reference in |
an article by the latter was construed |
into reflection upon G GeneraI Rosser's
Brigade in certain battle of the Civil |
War.
General Rosser, in certain CORES
pOndence which followed. denied that
General Munford had ever been COM
missioned a General. In recent issue
of the Times Dispatch, General Rosser
repeated the charge.
1t having since been declared by Mr..
John E. Hill of Albemare county, a
courier for General Munford, that he
delivered the commission of Brigadier-
General to Colonel Munford in April
1865, reporter of The Progress called
on General Rosser and asked his au.
thority for the statement published.
In reply, General Rosser produced the
following copy of the record in the
matter, and called attention to the ab
sence of any endorsement showing that
action had been taken: Ii
Headqrs. Lees Cav. Div.
Mar. Goth, 1865. 6
Genl s. Cooper
A. & 1. Genl. G. s. A.
General. II
| have the honor to recommend
that Col. ThOs. T. Munford, I'd Va.
Cav, senior Col. Wickham's (old)
Brigade be promoted to be Brigadier
General, vice Wickham, resigned, and t
that his commission date from the &C e
;eptance of Gen1 Wickham's resigna- t
5iOn. a
Very respectfully, t
Yr. obt.,sevt,
Fitz Lee. f
Maj Genl. Comd'g. a
Hdqrs Army N. Va. March %. 1865.
Resp'y forwarded and recommended. v
r. E. Lee. Genl. il
Reed A. e |. g. A. March 20, 1865. b
Resp'y sub. to Sec. War. R. il
In regard to this controversy We a
the following letter from r
IN old Maryland Confederate, and a u
member of Breatheds' celebrated bat d
allion:
Z s. Turk,
My Dear Sir:
What do you think of Fitz Lee at
his late day joining Tom Rosser in an :.
lttack on one of Virginias g greatest, =
most reliable living soldiers. Gen.
Tom Munford. Fitz Lee mentioned ''
as General in his Appomat- y
;ox report, April %, 1865, and also be- -
'ore the Gen. Warren Court of Enqui- y
y in 1881, when he was Wnder oath, q
md now stating in a letter to Gen.
Marcus J. Wright, (this is the letter =
2osser is banking OIL that MunfOrd =
lever was a Brig. General? Some =
months after the war Fitz Lee wrote l
20 Gen. M unford, as 1 am informed, q
him to let him have all
ORDERS, reports, etc., in his possession
Is he wanted to make up a report for
jen. r. E. lice. and Gen. Munford
no bad faith from a man r
'igning himself "your FRIEND" sent a
to Fitz Lee, his order for n
to Brig. General, among |
hem. Fttz Lee never returned those 4
papers, and having MunfOrd's papers Fl
hat were loaned to him writes that 8
etter to Gen. Wright. Is this the act v
If soldier and gentlemanY' A
haunting remembrance fingers still, of
hat most disgraceful, most disastrous
April 1st, 1864, at which
Pickett, FitZ Lee and Rosser were