From the 28 March 1869 issue of The New York Times.

Rebel Attacks on General Longstreet—Views of General Robert E. Lee.

From the Norfolk (Va.) Journal, March 25.

We ahve been actually wearied out by the numberless attacks we have seen made upon General LONGSTREET. For months past he has been a target at which every village editor has been popping his pellets of bad English. The probability of his appointment to an office in New-Orleans has made them more furious than ever; and the hatred that was formerly satisfied with a paragraph a day now displays itself in columns, with no prospect of an abatement of the nuisance.

Now, what is the cause of all this abuse? Simply this: A former Confederate General of high rank and reputation, presumed to think for himself without asking other people’s permission. He dared to avow his belief that politicians were damaging the South by the course they were pursuing. He deprecated the tone of the public Press among us, and the absurd speeches made by those public men who could not see that the world had moved. He deplored the action of Southern Legislatures in passing mischievous resolutions and acts, such as vagrant laws, and expressed himself in favor of the Fourteenth Amendment.

With regard to the Reconstruction laws, General LONGSTREET thougth that the best thing for us would be to accept them, and for this opinion he was ostracized and loaded with abuse such as we have never known a man to receive.

In his letter dated March 18, 1867, General LONGSTREET says: “We are a conquered people. Recognizing this fact fairly and squarely, there is but one course left for wise men to pursue, and that is to accept the terms that are now offered us by the conquerors. There can be no discredit to a conquered people for accepting the conditions offered by their conquerors, nor is there any occasion for a feeling of humiliation. We made an honest, and I hope, creditable fight, but we have lost. Let us come forward, then, and accept the ends involved in the struggle.”

Now, we ask any unprejudiced man if the above letter and the course of General LONGSTREET do not show him to be a man of brains? Which showed more sense, those now reviling him, or the man whom they have so reviled?

But he commanded in the Confederate army, and therefore he should not think that the acceptance of the Reconstruction acts was the best that the South could do for herself! This is the reasoning. It is not right, however, that it should apply to General LONGSTREET and not to General LEE, who thinks that the best thing that Virginia can do is to avail herself of the efforts of the Committee of Nine—in other words to accept the Reconstruction acts too.

The General’s appontment to office would have nothing to do with his opinions. We have no reason to suppose that they were ever influenced by prospective views of obtaining anything at the hands of the Government. We have no right to attribute wrong motives to a man, unless it can be proved that his course has been influenced by ambition or greed, and the making such charges is not only very uncharitable, but never injures any but those who make them.