From the 30 January 1903 issue of The New York Times.


Mr. CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, in his speech at the Confederate reunion the other evening, made a needful explanation of his suggestion, originally made at Charleston, for the erection not merely of a Confederate but of a National statue of ROBERT E. LEE. It was naturally inferred that he meant the commemoration to be made by act of Congress, and in that form the project naturally elicited much criticism. But he now explains that the inference was unwarranted, and that he meant the statue to be erected by popular subscription. In that case, it may be said to be the business of nobody but the subscribers.

Meanwhile, the project of commemorating LEE on the battlefield of Gettysburg, and by the joint action of Pennsylvania and Virginia, has provoked the discussion which it was so well adapted to excite. On the one hand it is urged that LEE was undoubtedly there, and that to leave out his share in the battle is, as it were, to ignore the battle altogether. Upon the whole, we should say that the predominance of the “old soldier element” was in favor of the project. It is true that a few posts of the G.A.R., none of them, we believe, in Pennsylvania, have expressed themselves against it. But The Army and Navy Journal sets forth that in its favor are all the surviving Major Generals of the Union Army who fought at Gettysburg, all but three of the surviving Brigadiers, and all but one of the surviving Colonels. It is certain that a monument of National magnanimity such as no other nation has ever erected, or could erect.