The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-09-02
Voice Of the People
Confederate History at william mud

Confederate History ut William md
Mary.
To the Editor of Tho Times-Dispatoh:
Sir,-My attention has been called
to letter in your issue OF August Il,
marty condemning the method in
which American history OF that part
OF It at least which relates to the
Confederate War" Is taught at the Col
lean history and tho Confederate War
arc both immense subjects, covering
many complicated events. but your
cism of the college on e few sentences
respecting the political views OF Con
oral Lee, found In a letter of mino
Transcript and afterwards twice re-
published In The Times Dispatch.
hunbly suggest that. as ono or more
swallows do not make a spring. SO
one or moro errors on the part of
President Lyon G. Tyler do not war
rant the sweeping Indictment against
cipal object IN writing the letter to
the Boston Transcript was to defend
General Lee from Mrs. Clark's inputa-
ton OF being n rebel. or, at best, "a
Marye, by gainsayinG my defense and
making none of his own for General
Clark and leaves him practically un-
defended. 1t is hard to believe that
any Southern man could have such an
| intention, but his article l think. bears
this construction.
Notwithstanding the formal decree
of condemnation issued by Mr.. Marye.
! have the hnrdihood to maintain that
the statements made by me and pro-
| nounccd by him as erroneous are cor
rect General Lee must be Judged by
time, and not wholly by a private let
ter to his son. When General Lee, in
his letter. said that the fathers of
hs 5snqo ad ne to fSF be se1
tered into a realm of political discus
sion which has never been clearly
comprehended. The very man. Mr..
ment of the United states in 1880 as
"a government proper" called Il "a
In my letter to the Boston Tran
script stated that General Lee was
a believer in the doctrine OF States
rights. and deemed Virginia his coun-
try ana I now repent the language
for the following reasons: Apart from
all technical and metaphysical sub
uet!os, the fundamental constitutional
distinction between men in 1861 was
the question of allegiance There
could be only two classes OF people
those who believe that superior allie
glance was due TO the United States
| and those who believed that superior
allegiance was due to the States. The
hrst class constituted the nationalists.
ana the second class the States rights
! men II made not n particle of differ
ence whether man believed in peace
neVed in revolution or not he was a
states rights man. provided he be-
licved In the superior claim of his
any question that General Lee regard
Cd Virginia as entitled to his al
iegiance? Mr. Marye tells us that
ne refused the ilattering offer of tile
supreme command OF the Federal army
| and accepted that of the Army of Viz
Einia. He even quotes ,he words of
G ,.n, Lee before the Virginia Con
n
Never except in defense OF my native
state Will ] draw my sword again"
BY his words and actions at this
time. General Lee let IL be known that
| Virginia was his country. and when it
came TO choosing between aNelsi 1ncc
nita iS s stats and he nIegiancs 70 the
| moment IN favor OF his State.
As TO the other paragraph of the
letter referred to by Mr. Nrarye. his
criticism is equally In error. This para
graph reads as follows: I'm common
with all the other Southern leaders.
General Lee held that g the Federal
sent or the governed to deny the
right OF secession was to abrogate the
( generally accepted idea OF what the
sttute the European doctrine of
| force Commenting upon this. Mr..
Marye cites in disproof General Lees
70 his son that the Union could not
| be dissolved by State secession but
only by revolution or the consent of
! all the people in convention assem-
hled." Now, that these sentiments of
General Lee conflict with the para
! graph above IS wholly u misconcep-
I ton of MIR Marye and another evil
dence OF HIS confused and hasty gen.
/ eralization My reference here is
clearly to .'secession," as contemplated
In the Declaration OF Independence as
natural right. In this great state
| paper the American doctrine Of peace
| was set forth in striking contrast with
| the European doctrine of force and
! conquest With the pen or an inspired
( prophet JEFFERSON declared that all
/ governments derive their just powers
| from the consent OF the governed" and
| he asserted the inherent right of n
! people TO change their government
/ whenever they deemed ii necessary
! The only Limitation seemed to be one
! or rcason---a reasonable population and
/ iCasonable territory. Beverly Mum
| ford, in his "Virginia's Attitude To-
wards Slavery and Secession" declares
( that all in Virginia who did not be-
! heve in the constitutional right TO Sc
| aration. based on the Declaration of
| independents. General Lee certainly
believed in 1t, for these are his words
/ from the same letter to his son: still
! union that can only be maintained
| by sword and bayonets and in which
| civil strife and war are TO take the
! place of brotherly love and Kindness.
| has no charm for me" And yet that
! was the very kind OF Union which
| Lincoln and the nationaIists proposed
! Surely the Southern people in 1861
| with population and territory near
! ~ three times as great the Amor
| leans possessed in 1876. We're on the
! principles of the Declaration OF indie
esneenee. lar more omitted ta!La sep.