Page:Southern Historical Society Papers volume 05.pdf/276

Rh matters of deliberate judgment as the impulses of a great mind disturbed by unparallelled conditions"; that he, himself, alone understood the requirements of the occasion, and if he had been allowed to control the operations of the army, a brilliant victory would have ensued; and that every other officer in any responsible position, outside of his own immediate command, was grossly derelict, or terribly blundered. All this he claims the right to do, for the benefit of "the Comte de Paris and the general historian," because he is "the only living person who could explain the motif of that campaign and the true reasons of its failure."

He laid the foundation for enlightening the "general historian" in regard to the demerits and deficiencies of General Lee, and his own superior claims to the leadership of the Army of Northern Virginia, by a letter written to his uncle, on the 24th day of July, 1863, which letter would have never seen the light of day if he had not, himself, given it to the public. In that letter he said:

The arrogance and egotism of all this might be to some extent pardonable when confined to a private confidential letter to a near relative; but when that letter is given to the public by its author, they become insufferable. The part of the letter published concludes as follows:

The spirit of the first part of this latter passage is very self-sacrificing and commendable indeed, but the declaration of it is confined to the ear of his uncle, until the letter is made public for the purpose of showing that General Lee made an inexcusable blunder in framing his own plans, and rejecting the wiser counsels of the writer of that letter; and, when the attempt is made to show that the latter was really at fault in not cordially, promptly, and vigorously seconding the plans of the Commanding General, he cries out most lustily that he is the victim of "the ill-natured and splenetic attacks" of "certain wordy soldiers," in a "tom-tom warfare." These figures of rhetoric are,