of the possibility of an erroneous date; and his statement must be confined to the time when the letter bears date.[1]
The answer to this theory of wrong date is furnished by the facts. Change the date of The Duty Letter to whatever time you please, and the first two sentences are still impossible. They affirm two things: (1) "I am just in the act of leaving home for New Mexico"; and (2) "My fine old regiment has been ordered to that distant region, and I must hasten to see that they are properly taken care of." So the new date must satisfy two conditions, which must concur and co-exist, viz: (1) General Lee must be at home, in the act of leaving, in haste, for New Mexico, and (2) his fine old regiment must recently (this is clearly implied) have been ordered to New Mexico. But as General Lee was never in New Mexico, nor was the Second Cavalry ever ordered to New Mexico,[2] let us change "New Mexico," as written in The Duty Letter, to Texas, treating "New Mexico," as a slip of the pen, when Texas was meant. Such [1] is totally unlike General Lee, but let it be supposed as a concession for the sake of the argument.
When, then, did General Lee, after he became Lieutenant-Colonel of the Second Cavalry, leave home (Arlington) to join his regiment in Texas? Only twice, once in February, 1856, and again in February, 1860. This is shown, not only by the records in the office of the Adjutant-General at Washington, but also appears conclusively from General Lee's letters and Memorandum Book covering the period from 1855, when the Second
- ↑ It is suggested by some who contend for The Wrong Date Theory, that, besides changing the date of The Duty Letter to fit the facts, the name of the addressee may also, if necessary, be changed. Instead of "G. W. Custis Lee" as the addressee, as was printed in the Sun, why, they argue, may not this be a mistake for "W. H. Fitzhugh Lee" (often called "Rooney" Lee), General Lee's second son, the letter being written to him, at a later date, while he was a student at Harvard University? But as is shown in the text, no date can be found which will reconcile the statements in the first two sentences of The Duty Letter with the actual facts, and this is equally true whether the letter be supposed to have been written to the addressee, "G. W. Custis Lee," or to his brother, W. H. Fitzhugh Lee, or to anybody else.
- ↑ "In reply to your letter of the 24th instant, I have the honor to inform you that the Second Cavalry did not serve in New Mexico at any time prior to the Civil War." Letter to the writer, from the Adjutant-General's office, dated July 27, 1914.
