by Charles Marshall, Joseph Eggleston Johnston and Jubal Early

Summary

by Charles Marshall, Joseph Eggleston Johnston and Jubal Early Southern Historical Society Papers (1876)

If General Lee had more men than McClellan had, it would be impossible to explain why he did not destroy the army of the latter. Hence it is that we, who were so long connected with that army, feel it incumbent on us to place the real facts before the world whenever they are incorrectly stated. In doing so we feel that we are doing no wrong to any, for the fame of all our armies and their commanders must rest upon their own deeds, and that of none can be enhanced by depreciating others, or diminished by giving credit to those who are deserving of it.
Source: Wikisource

by Charles Marshall, Joseph Eggleston Johnston and Jubal Early Southern Historical Society Papers (1876)

I now challenge the most critical examination of the estimate I have given of the strength of the army which drove McClellan from the siege of Richmond in 1862; and in regard to the figures furnished by General Johnston on the authority of the officers named by him, I am willing to abide the result of a personal appeal to the survivors of them, having already the assurance of one of them that General Johnston misapprehended him, and that his official report (to which I have referred) is right, and shows the effective strength he brought to Virginia.
Source: Wikisource

by Charles Marshall, Joseph Eggleston Johnston and Jubal Early Southern Historical Society Papers (1876)

Every soldier of the Army of Northern Virginia who has not proved a renegade, feels that he has a personal interest in the fame of its great commander, and when error is propagated in regard to his campaigns and his history, we all feel that we have a right, nay, that there is a solemn duty incumbent on us to challenge it, from however high a source it may come, or by whatever motives it may be prompted.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature