It may be that the course claimed by Mr. Hunter to have been advised by him, would have been the wiser. Indeed, in the light of the present, it might have been wiser not to have fought at all, but to have surrendered at Lincoln's call for 75,000 men!
But whatever men may think of that, I believe it will not be considered extravagant to say that a proposition to surrender the cause and abandon the battle for freedom, after the conference at Hampton Roads, would have been received (and justly, as I think,) by the army and the people as the inspiration of either pusillanimity or treason.
I have the honor to be, yours very truly and respectfully,
F. R. Lubbock,
GRANT AS A SOLDIER AND CIVILIAN.
The war which placed General Grant in the high position he so lately occupied, is so recent and was so fierce, that it is natural his contemporaries should entertain opinions widely different as to the conduct and capacity of the successful general who ended it.
Even European critics have been affected by the flood of military reports which have been poured forth by the able and ingenious historians who accompanied the Northern armies—and their discrimination has been dazzled by the glare of the great results accomplished by General Grant—so that they oftentimes seem to overestimate his capacities as a commander.
On the other hand, it has been difficult for the conquered people of the South to recognize the virtues or even to admit the high capacities which may be found in the leaders who have wrought us so much evil.
But there are indications of a returning sense of justice in the factions so lately arrayed against each other in the bloodiest drama of modern times, and as the era of peace and fraternity, of which we of the South have heard so much and seen so little, is near at hand, a discussion of the military conduct of the great Captains who led the opposing hosts may now be conducted in a spirit of fairness—and in such manner as may conserve the interests of history.
