Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-11-05


obvious in some parts, but always vigorous,
and again tender and never dull. And to
find Tom Hendricks, after achieving his
greatest triumph and winning the best wo-
man in the world throwing himself in be-
tween a drunken old feudiSt and his uncon-
scious victim, to receive the fatal shot in
his own breast is rather too much for the
sympathetic reader to stand. If it is the
highest function of the physician to save
life, Dr. Streeter should have saved this
man at all hazards, for there was surely
another story in him.
THE BOOK OF CLEVER BEASTS; Studies in Un-
natural History, By Myrtle Reed. Illustrated
Sons. Washington: Woodward & Lothrop
There is no harm in poking fun at the
well meaning naturalists, whether of the
plain or fancy variety, who are seeking to
inform the world that the human animals
have no monopoly on intelligence and So
cial qualities. They have told some amaZ-
ing tales, have opened the eyes of their
readers to vast reaches of animal intellect.
So Miss Reed offers a few variations
of the theme, aided and abetted by Mr..
Peter Newell, whose natural history is a
school by itself. 1t is possible to trace
strong resemblances between some of these
creations and others that have been more
seriously offered. For instance, Jagg, the
Skootaway Goat; Little Upsidasi and Snoof
These and the others are all pleasant crea-
lures TO know, a trlf1e unconventional IN
their ways, SO far as the animals of liter
airy natural history may serve as a guide.
They make good reading, though, provoca-
tive of deep laughter and long memories.
LEE AND LoNGsTREET AT HIGH TIDE; Get.
tysburg in the light of the Official Records. BY
Helen ID. Longstreet. Gainesville, Ga: Pub
lfshed by the Author.
The controversy over General Longs
streets course of action in the battle Of
Gettysburg was at once time as spirited as
any of the disputes in American history,
though the field of debate was limited to
those in sympathy with the southern states
or those who were interested in the con-
test merely as military students. The
north never was wrought up much by the
question whether Longstreet did his whole
duty. To the north the consciousness that
the battle resulted in Union victory was
enough. 1t was not greatly concerned over
dispute as to whether one of the southern
commanders failed. In fact, it would have
been somewhat disparaging to the triumph
to have admitted that it was due, in part
at least, to the blunders of the other side
rather than to the successful execution of
well-laid plans of the federal commander.
But TO the followers OF the lost cause the
subject was one of great interest Il was
felt that Gettysburg was actually high tide
banners went down in defeat the ebb of
southern fortune began. Disappointment
was intense and when a scapegoat was
found resentment was bitter. Various cir
cumStanceS concentrated this anger on
General Longstreet, one of Lees corps
comma nders al Gettysburg. and his widow
has undertaken to prove from the records
that the charge of unfaithfulness to duty
is unfounded. In addition to a discussion
of the Gettysburg controversy she has add
ed many pages of tribute to 'Longstreet
the man. description of his experience
on the fields of Mexico, in the great bat
ties before and after Gettysburg and an
appendix giving an account of his funeral
last winter, tributes from the press, reso-
lutions by camps and chapters, tribute
from the G. A. r. and letters from Presi-
dent Roosevelt and many Others An in
teresting part of the work is the introduce
ton written by Gen. d. E. Sickles, who
says: "Longstreet's example was the rain
bow of reconciliation that foreshadowed
real peace between the north and south
His statesmanlike forecast bIazed
the path of progress and prosperity for his
people, impoverished by war and discour-
aged by adversely. He was the first of the
iliustrious southern war leaders to accent
the result of the great conflict as final''
The first positive utterance holding Gen.
Gettysburg owing to failure to obey Lees
orders came from Rev. DR.. William NJ
Pendleton of Virginia, January IT, 1873,
over two years after the death of Gen. Lee.
In an ADDRESS delivered at Lexington, Va.
In behalf of a memorial church to Gen.
Lee Dr. Pendleton said: "He Gen, Lee) in
formed me that he had ordered Longstreet
to attack on that front at sunrise the NEXT
morning" DIR. Pendleton was a brigadier
general and chief of artillery on Lees stan.
Gen. Early and others quickly added cor
roborating testimony and the controversy
was definitely set forth. Mrs. Longstreet
quotes letters from numerous officers who
should have been In position to know yet
who knew nothing about such an order
She locates the various parts of Long
streets corps and argues that such an at
tack would have been impossible at sunrise
July 2. 1868, and consequently such an