The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1909-02-17

making a mere protestation of rec-
erence for Robert E. Lee. I feel
In my spirit as IL l felt called upon TO
protest that did actually respect and
venerate the father from whose loins
sprang.
nowhere In this prize essay, In my
Judgment. can any fair Interpretation
discover a purpose to claim or q
statement to the effect that Robert f..
Lee was traitor in any odious sense.
1t is an axiom of Interpretation that
1t Is fundamentally unfair and pro-
ductive Of wrong conclusions to Judge
OF any literary production by detach-
ed sentences taken from IL. and even
more unjust and confusing to cut In
twain the sentences thus detached
Yet this Is precisely what has been
done In the case Of Miss Boysen's pa
per. The entire paragraph In which
occurs the detached sentence from
which the statement has gone abroad
that DR.. Smith and I indorsed a pa
per stigmatizing General Lee as a
traitor are as follows:
This was the position that Lee took
He loved the Union for which he had
fought. but when the Union became
an invading army he must act. He
realized that his decision would prob
ably draw many Southerners into the
conflict; that his Arlington would be-
come camping ground of the ene-
my; that his loyalty would be ques-
toned. but the soil Of Virginia called
him, and to that call there could be
but one answer. The slave system with
which he thus took sides was vastly
different from the general institution
of the South. In Virginia that order
still retained some of its patriarchal
character; II was dignifed and not
material. 'Tf I owned the 1000, 900
slaves Of the South" ne writes, "I
would gladly sacrifice them to the
Union. but how can I draw the sword
on Virginia. my native State? (Out-
look. vo. lxxxiv. page $3.50
Personally Lee had everything to
gain by any other decision. He was
the most prominent man In the Fed
eral Army: he had already been Of
fered the command Of its forces. (See
Trent's Robert E. Lee" Chronology
OF Lees Life" also Longs Memoirs
Of r.. e. Lee." page s1.) But to him
duty was the sublimest word In the
language. and 80 ne, threw himself
and all he had-his home. his fortune
and his chances OF personal advance
bent-into a desperate cause. He was
a traitor In that he sacrificed all to aid
the enemies of his country. "but so
were George Washington and John
Hampden and William Of Orange. &C.
r. Adams In q speech. "Shall Crom-
well Have Statue?") But things
which are technically of the highest
criminality may at times be OF the
least disgrace. To do now what he
did then would be treason, TOR the
Civil War has since then taught what
Is right in this regard. But the mat
ter Of secession has purposely been
left open by the trainers of the Con-
situation. and in the minds of many
sincere people. both North and South,
IL was still question. (Page 16
Hosmer's THE Appeal to Arms
American National Series.) The real
issue was not between patriotism and
the want of 1t. but between two forms
Of 1t. and the point to be borne in mind
Is that those who believed in one con-
ception were as loyal as those who
clung to another. To the Southerner
loyalty meant loyalty to the State and
duty meant going with the State In
victory or defeat. Judged from this
standpoint. the willingness to sacri-
fee anything but honor, Lee and the
South he represented constitute the
real patriotic riches OF the nation -
Outlook. Vol. lxxiv. page 64S.) The
tragedy of the situation lay in the fact
that there were patriots on both sides
and the beauty now lies in the spirit
in which both sides have accepted the
outcome of the war as the best. Be-
fore long we shall come to think of
Lee as the English have come to
think Of Washington. whom lately
they regarded as a rebel, for, indeed,
he differed from the greater Wash
ington only in choosing the wrong
side.
Even these paragraphs, quoted
alone. are unfair. for at the very out
set Of her paper she refutes the old