General Fitzhugh Lee, by Harry Warren Readnour, Chapter 8

General Fitzhugh Lee: A Biographical Study


When Fitzhugh Lee made his triumphal entry into Washington on April 11, 1898, he was given little time to enjoy the popular demonstrations in his honor. The capital and the nation were gripped by a frantic scramble to prepare for the coming struggle with Spain. War was not formally declared until April 25, but Lee experienced a hectic schedule during the two weeks. The opinions of Lee—hailed as “The Right Man in the Right Place at the Right Time” for his recent consular service—were eagerly sought by the President and State Department officials, members of he Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and especially by Secretary Russell A. Alger and other War Department officials.1 During his service in Cuba, the Consul-General had taken considerable pains to observe and study Spanish military fortifications and had provided the War Department with voluminous information.2 His observations in Cuba were now an invaluable resource to the Army as it prepared to invade the island. Lee met with Commanding General Nelson A. Miles (the two had been opposing cavalry leaders in Virginia during 1864–1865) and other soldiers to assist in planning a strategy against the Spanish foe.

The presence of Lee at the center of the bustling activity in the War Department promptly sparked rumors and speculation of his return to active military service. Owing to his knowledge of Cuban conditions, the press and numerous private citizens urged the appointment of the former Consul-General as commander of the American expeditionary forces assigned to invade Cuba.3 In a burst of patriotism capped by the desire for a dramatic event to symbolize national unity, Northerners and Southerners alike also called for Lee’s appointment for that reason. Lee, a longtime proponent of sectional reconciliation, soon found himself portrayed as the personification of national reunion. On May 4, 1898, the ex-Confederate general (aged sixty-two) was formally confirmed a major general in the Volunteer Army of the United States by the Senate.4 The appointment received an enthusiastic reception throughout the country, and Lee accepted his commission with great pleasure and satisfaction. After an absence of thirty-three years, the old soldier reentered his beloved profession—the gnawing frustration he had borne for a third of a century was over! For him, at least, the cycle of reunion was complete—a United States regular army lieutenant (1861), resigned; a major general, Confederate States Army (1865), paroled; and a major general, United States Volunteers (1898), nominated, confirmed, and eager to serve his country in the “Federal blue” once more. As if to augment the reconciliatory significance of his appointment, two first lieutenants were assigned to his staff. One was Fitzhugh Lee, Jr. (his son), and the other was Algernon Sartoris (a grandson of Ulysses S. Grant).5

Unfortunately, Lee’s hopes to lead the American forces which would liberate Havana were dashed by a combination of circumstances.6 His friends believed that McKinley and the Republicans, seeing the growth of popular enthusiasm for Lee, had no wish to crown him with military glory and thereby make him a possible candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1900.7 However, McKinley was guided by considerations other than Lee’s political future. The President, having been a s soldier himself in the Civil War, was leery of marring his administration with appointments of “political generals” which might lead to disastrous results in combat. Accordingly, in the vast expansion of the Army beginning in April, out of the twenty-six major generals he appointed, nineteen were regular Army officers and these latter tended to be given the choice commands. While his West Point training and pre-1865 military service precluded his classification as a political general in the strict sense of the term, the fact remained that General Lee had not been on active duty since Appomattox. Consequently, regular Army officers were given preference over him. But McKinley, an astute and skillful politician, also realized the advantages of recalling able Southerners to the colors. The last Civil War veteran in the White House did not deliberately maneuver to give Lee and the other ex-Confederate general, “Fighting Joe” Wheeler, the poorest assignments. Wheeler, in fact, went on to win some degree of fame in fighting in Cuba and later in Puerto Rico, but Fitz unluckily (in his own view) received no opportunity during the war to participate in combat operations.8

On May 26, Lee was given command of the Seventh Corps, United States Volunteers.9 This force of nearly thirty thousand men was by no means an insignificant assignment for General Lee nor was it indicative of any presidential intrigue to bury Fitz in limbo. The Corps, in the process of being organized at Jacksonville and Tampa, was scheduled for embarkation to Cuba as soon as transport facilities were available. However, the logistical incompetence of the War and Navy Departments—the most serious deficiency in the American military effort against the Spanish—caused a few month’s delay in landing Lee’s army in Cuba.10 The Corps was sufficiently welded together to meet his standards as an effective fighting unit during the wait for transportation facilities, but Lee soon found—much to his chagrin—that the Seventh Corps would never see battle. The war in Cuba was of unexpectedly brief duration since San Juan Hill was captured on July 2, and by July 17, the fighting in Cuba was over for all practical purposes. On August 12, Spain called for an armistice and hostilities ceased.11

Lee’s service in the Spanish conflict thus proved to be the opposite of his career as a Confederate general. Instead, it was more reminiscent of his staff duties under Van Dorn in those far distant days of his membership in the U.S. Second Cavalry. General Lee not only spent his time in preparing the Seventh Corps for combat but also found himself serving as an adviser to military authorities in Washington. He was called to Washington several times for consultations—the former Consul-general was still considered an expert on Cuban conditions—even though his command remained in Florida.12 However, unlike the period of intensive staff work prior to the Van Dorn expedition forty years earlier, the old soldier’s painstaking efforts were not destined to be rewarded this time with success on the battlefield. Ironically, the laurels he won during the Spanish-American War resulted from his direction of the Seventh Corps during its organization and training stages. Lee, always conscientious about the welfare of his men, was concerned with their health and consequently took an elaborate interest in initiating and maintaining proper sanitary measures for his unit. No more than two percent of Lee’s Corps were ever hospitalized or otherwise listed as unfit for duty–a phenomenally low incidence of sickness in a war in which whole regiments were sometimes incapacitated. To Secretary of War Alger and the presidential commission investigating the War Department, Lee’s unit was a pleasant surprise in contrast to the usual pestilence-ridden camps. Seeking his advice on he subject of health, they soon discovered the reason for his superior performance: other generals tended to ignore sanitation problems, but Lee gave them his strictest attention and personally supervised the execution of his orders relating the matter.13

While Lee was disappointed with his failure to participate directly in the defeat of his former Spanish adversaries, he received at least the consolation of being back in his chosen profession. In December 1898, he finally returned to Cuba in uniform, not as the head of one of the liberating armies, but as a member of the American occupation forces. Although McKinley was urged to appoint General Lee the military governor of Cuba, that position was given to Major General John R. Brooke, since the latter was a regular Army officer with thirty-eight years of continuous service. As a consolation, Lee received the assignment of occupying and policing Havana and its surrounding provinces until the establishment of an independent Cuban government.14 With the end of the war in Cuba and the termination of Spanish sovereignty on January 1, 1899, the United States Army assumed formal responsibility for the island’s government. The military government of Brooke and his four major subordinates—Generals Lee, William Ludlow, James H. Wilson, and Leonard Wood—was assigned the duty of commanding the American forces of occupation and supervising the civil administration. In accordance with the Teller Amendment (the proviso, adopted by Congress when war was declared against Spain, which precluded the formal annexation of Cuba by the United States), their announced goal was to pacify Cuba and then relinquish control to the Cuban people at some indefinite date.15

For two years, Lee was destined to serve in the military government of Cuba in various capacities. Unlike his previous two years in Cuba as consul-general, his second tenure was relatively free of crises. Nonetheless, his second assignment proved to be more complex and formidable than he expected. Shortly after his return to Cuba, he even began to write a book (in collaboration with General Wheeler) about the island and the war. However, the duties of his occupation assignment soon became too onerous and troublesome for him to devote much time to such a project.16 The major difficulties which he faced resulted from the slowness of Brooke and the Washington politicians in promulgating a clear policy concerning the island’s present affairs and its future status. Consequently, Lee found himself involved once more in a Cuban imbroglio.

General Lee and other officials of the military government were concerned with, and wished to participate in, the gradual formulation of American policy towards Cuba; however, they were confronted with the more pressing task of eradicating the wretched conditions in the war-ravaged island. Consequently, Lee first devoted much of his attention and energy to providing for the well-being of the Cuban populace within his geographic area of responsibility (which consisted of Havana province, but not the city itself, and the adjacent province of Pinar del Rio). During his first year, Lee was primarily concerned with the tasks of restoring public order, fighting disease and starvation, and providing other humanitarian services. He and the other members of the American occupation force engaged in a massive program of national reconstruction to alleviate the plight of the Cubans that resulted from four years of rebellion and war.17

Simultaneously with this reconstruction endeavor of American soldiers, a change of personnel in President McKinley’s cabinet also affected Cuba. On August 1, 1899, Elihu Root formally assumed office as the new Secretary of War. Root promptly solicited the advice of the generals in the military government in determining a Cuban policy.18 Prior to Root’s request of August 18, however, General Lee had already turned his attention to the future governmental status of Cuba. On August 15, he proposed that the United States should initiate the beginning of its compliance with the Teller Amendment. He urged the calling of a constitutional convention and an election of national officers as soon as possible in order that “the pledged faith of the Government of the United States to Cuba can be kept.” Lee thought the American troops should be stationed in the island until the success of the new government had been established. Thereafter, the Cuban people themselves could decide if they preferred an American protectorate or annexation to the United States.19 In September, in response to the inquiry of the Secretary of War, he again submitted his opinions on Cuba’s future and declared that the Cubans:

. . . are as capable of organizing a form of government today as they ever will be. If they construct a “stable government” strong enough to protect life and property and give confidence to capital, they should be entitled to control their own affairs. If not, the strong hand of the United States must be placed again on the helm and guide he future course of this beautiful and fertile island out from the shadows of a dark past into the broad sunlight of a bright future.20

Fitzhugh Lee believed the end of uncertainty about Cuba’s status would stimulate foreign investment and, as a result, a rise in the living standards of the island’s poorer classes. Since his days as consul-general, he had praised its natural resources and speculated that American investors could reap large profits while turning the land into a paradise. As a general in the occupation force, he continued to hold these ideas and urged Americans to participate in Cuba’s economic development.21

Lee, whose viewpoints were shared by General Wilson, had no qualms about possible future annexation of Cuba by the United States. Both men professed little hope that the Cubans would be very successful in self-governing. They expected increased American investments would bind the island securely to the United States and, in any case, the island’s destiny would be entwined with its continental neighbor. However, the two generals believed the United States was honor bound to comply (at least technically) with the Teller Amendment and give the Cubans the opportunity to establish their independence.22 Such a course also had the advantage of lessening the possibility of a Cuban insurrection against American military forces comparable to the then current struggle in the Philippines.23 In contrast, Generals Wood and Ludlow preferred the indefinite stay of the military in Cuba. Wood, in particular, desired eventual annexation but only after a long period of tutelage by which time the Cubans themselves would see the wisdom of that course. He advocated their Americanization through the agency of the military government. Consequently, he attempted to set an example of honesty and high-mindedness in public office that would impress upon the Cubans the advantages of American rule.24 In summary, the four generals agreed that eventual annexation was desirable and probably inevitable, but they disagreed on the timing and method of annexation. Lee and Wilson believed Cuba should be granted independence as soon as possible. After its failure, the Cubans would then join the United States. Wood and Ludlow maintained that the benefits of continued American occupation would finally persuade the Cubans to accept annexation voluntarily.

Elihu Root, after receiving the generals’ opinions, pondered their suggestions for several months before finally making his recommendations of Cuba’s future to President McKinley. General Wood replaced Brooke (who viewed the American occupation as definitely temporary in nature) as military governor on December 20, 1899, and it was speculated that his proposals would be adopted eventually.25 Surprisingly, many of the recommendations pertaining to Cuba’s future made by Lee, rather than by Wood, were accepted by Washington authorities (partially owing to the continued fighting in the Philippines and the public reaction to it). The United States announced that Cuban independence would be granted as soon as a Cuban government was formed, and Lee, during his last month of service in Cuba, witnessed the convoking of a constitutional convention in November 1900. The Constitution of 1901 established the new Republic of Cuba, but others shared Lees views on the inability of the Cubans to maintain their independence. Accordingly, the Platt Amendment (providing for American intervention in Cuban affairs) was appended to the Constitution and provided a protectorate status similar to the one he had envisioned. Of course, the permanent annexation of Cuba by the United States, which he also expected, never occurred.26

Lee served most of his last year in Cuba under Wood (from December 1899 to November 1900), but there was little conflict between the two despite their disagreement on the length of American occupation. For example, both cooperated in working to improve Cuban economic conditions. Their amiable relationship continued until Lee was recalled to the United States. Fitzhugh Lee left the island for the last time on November 15, 1900, and assumed command of the Department of the Missouri at Omaha, Nebraska, on December 4. His service at his new post was of brief duration, however, since the general (aged sixty-five) believed he should resign and make way for younger men. His third military career culminated with his acceptance of the rank of brigadier general, U.S. Army (regular), on March 2, 1901, followed by his retirement the next day.27

General and Mrs. Lee then moved to Charlottesville, Virginia, where they expected to spend the remainder of their lives. The retired general looked forward to a varied but more relaxed mode of living than he had experienced in the past several years.28 Lee promptly became involved in civic activities, once settled in Charlottesville. His favorite project was the plan of the Jefferson Memorial Road association to build a three-mile hard-surface road from downtown Charlottesville to the grave of Thomas Jefferson at Monticello. This project, a happy blend of economic improvement and patriotism, was to serve as “a lesson in making good roads” as well as a memorial to the great statesman. With his characteristic vigor, the old gentleman accepted the presidency of the Association. In April 1902, he chaired the Jefferson Memorial and Interstate Good Roads Convention, which was held in Charlottesville. At the three-day meeting, Lee stressed the hope that the memorial project would serve as an encouraging example of the practicality of good highways not only to Virginia, but to all Southerners. The Jefferson Memorial Road was completed a year later.29

Unfortunately, Fitz had less time to enjoy participation in civic affairs than he had anticipated. His idyllic retirement ended abruptly on September 10, 1902, when he finally agreed to accept the presidency of the Jamestown Exposition Company. The Company had been chartered in March by the General Assembly to promote and direct the celebration of the Jamestown Tercentennial Exposition of 1907. Lee, strongly motivated by his state (and national) patriotism, accepted the task of bringing the proposed project to a successful completion.30 The grandiose nature of the plans to celebrate Jamestown’s three-hundredth anniversary was reflected by the join resolution of the Virginia Assembly in 1901. This resolution invited not simply all Americans but “all the English-speaking peoples of the earth” to share in this exhibit of “the products of peace and fruits of free institutions in all the realms of human ingenuity.”31 The ambitious goals of the celebration’s promoters were not commensurate with their financial resources, however, and the aged general faced overwhelming obstacles in raising the necessary funds. Eventually, he persuaded the General Assembly to appropriate $200,000 and obtained one million dollars in popular subscriptions by January 1, 1904 (the company had to secure the latter amount by that date or its charter would become void). Congress, although asked for sums varying from three to five millions, voted only $250,000. After that disappointment, lee tried a barnstorming of state legislatures and was successful in persuading twenty-two states to participate in the Exposition.

These efforts were a severe strain on the general’s health and a contributory cause of his death in 1905—he was returning home from a tour of New England when he succumbed to an attack of apoplexy in Washington, D.C. The Exposition was not a fitting memorial to Fitzhugh Lee. Although President Theodore Roosevelt and some 2,850,735 visitors passed through the gates between April 26 and November 30, 1907, it was a financial failure. Moreover, the celebration was highly commercialized. The emphasis on honoring and glorifying the rich heritage of the Old Dominion as well as the nation—the principal purpose of Lee despite his long interest in the promotion of economic progress—became a minor consideration to his successors.32

The reactions of Virginians and other Americans to Lee’s death on April 28, 1905, were much more indicative of his status among his contemporaries. With great pomp and ceremony—and full military honors—the body of the old soldier was transferred from Washington to Richmond. In Richmond, the crowds observing his elaborate funeral procession numbered in the thousands as his fellow citizens paid their last tribute to his memory. During this period of public mourning, perhaps the most typical of the hundreds of eulogies delivered was the following:

Fitzhugh Lee lived a life upon the level on which history is made—and died in the harness as doubtless he would have preferred to die—just short of the three score years and ten that the Bible has allotted to man. . . . Lee was a man of unusual capacity, a man of unflinching courage, a man who stood for the finest traditions of Virginia, s soldier, a statesman, a diplomat, an example and a light to his fellow citizens. . . .

And when all is said, the most that the dead can do for the living is to leave such an example as shall make for the uplifting of the race, for the inspiration of the young, and for the firm grounding of such ideals as shall leaven the body politic.

This Fitzhugh Lee unquestionably did. More need not be said of him or of any man.

On May 4, 1905, General Fitzhugh Lee was appropriately buried in Hollywood Cemetery, the final resting place of numerous heroic and famous Americans.33


1 Washington Post, April 13, 1898.

2 For example, see Lee to Daniel S. Lamont (Cleveland’s Secretary of War), May 23, 29, and June 21, 1896, Daniel S. Lamont Papers, Library of Congress; Lee to Day, June 2 (1 cable, 1 dispatch) and June 9, 1897, Dispatches from Havana, RG 59, NA; Day to Lee, January 18, 1898, Opie Papers.

3 “A Place for Fitzhugh Lee” (editorial), Washington Post, April 21, 1898: “Serious Words for Veterans,„ The Confederate Veteran, VI, No. 4 (April, 1898), 146; Robert L. Scribner, “Ex-Confederate in Blue: Fitzhugh Lee,” The Virginia Cavalcade, V, No. 4 (Spring, 1956), 16–22.

4 U.S. Senate, Journal of the Executive Proceedings, 55th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1898, pp. 745, 758–759; for a complete survey of Lee’s military career, consult General Fitzhugh Lee, Document File No. 77633, Records of the Adjutant General’s Office, Record Group 94, The National Archives (hereafter Lee File, A.G.O., RG 94, NA). A typical letter found in the file which reflects the widespread demand for Lee’s appointment is C. A. Woodson to President McKinley, May 3, 1898.

5 Scriber, “Ex-Confederate in Blue,” 19; for public reaction to the appointments of Lee and another ex-Confederate major general, Joseph Wheeler, see “Major-Generals of the Volunteer Army,” Harper’s Weekly, XLII (May 14, 1898), 478, and Rufus R. Wilson, “The Leaders of Our Army,” Munsey’s Magazine, XIX, No. 5 (August, 1898), 651–653, 663.

6 Ella L. McCrary, “Life and Public Services of Fitzhugh Lee,” Midland Monthly, X (July, 1898), 42–47.

7 Hunter, “Fitzhugh Lee,” 139; John Leslie Hall, Half-Hours in Southern History (Richmond, 1907), 18–19.

8 Morgan, America’s Road to Empire 68–71; Margaret Leech, In the Days of McKinley (New York, 1959), 236–237; Walter Millis, The Martial Spirit: A Study of Our War with Spain (Boston, 1931), 161, 267–268; 270–276, 283, and 289.

9 F. C. Ainsworth to P. J. McCumber, May 21, 1906, Lee File, A.G.O., RG 94, NA. This letter from the Military Secretary of the War Department to Senator McCumber, Chairman of the Committee of Pensions, contains a complete summary of Lee’s military career according to official records (including his Confederate service). The career of Wheeler in the Spanish-American War is discussed in John P. Dyer, “Fightin’ Joe” Wheeler (Baton Rouge, La., 1961), 339 ff.

10 The camp near Jacksonville was called “Cuba Libre.” U.S. Senate, Report of the Commission Appointed by the President to Investigate the Conduct of the War Department in the War with Spain, 56th Con., 1st Sess., 1900, Doc. No. 221, III, 81–82; William Jennings Bryan to Lee, December 30, 1898, Opie Papers.

11 Millis, The Martial Spirit, and Frank Freidel, The Splendid Little War (New York, 1958), provide detailed accounts of the war; but also consult Morgan’s America’s Road to Empire and his William McKinley as well as Leech’s In the Days of McKinley.

12 Assistant Adjutant General to Lee, May 17, 1898, Lee to General H. C. Corbin, May 17, 1898, H. C. Corbin to Lee, August 13, 1898, George H. Hopkins to Lee, September 25, 1898, and Lee to Adjutant General, September 27, 1898, Lee File, A.G.O., RG 94, NA.

13 Report, Commission to Investigate the War Department, 81–95. In his testimony on October 6, 1898, Lee also recalled his past residence in Cuba and pointedly suggested that the heavy uniforms worn by his troops and those already in Cuba bordered on criminal idiocy.

14 F. C. Ainsworth to P. J. McCumber, May 21, 1906, and John H. Henryrut to President McKinley, September 28, 1898, Lee File, A.G.O., RG 94, NA; David F. Healy, The United States in Cuba, 1898–1902: Generals, Politicians, and the Search for Policy (Madison, Wis., 1963), 51–52.

15 Allan R. Millett, The Politics of Intervention: The Military Occupation of Cuba, 1906–1909 (Columbus, Ohio, 1968), 29–44; see also Healy, The United States in Cuba, 53–64, Wilson was a West Point graduate who had left the Army after the Civil War, while Ludlow and Wood were regular army officers temporarily holding a higher rank in the volunteer forces. After the ratification of the treaty with Spain on February 6, 1899, Lee and his colleagues were reduced to the rank of brigadier general as a result of the reduction in the military forces.

16 Their book, entitled Cuba’s Struggle Against Spain with the Causes for American Intervention and a Full Account of the Spanish-American War, including Final Peace Negotiations, was finally published by the American Historical Press (New York) in 1899. Lee wrote only the first 93 pages while Wheeler produced the remaining 500. Theodore Roosevelt wrote the final appendage entitled “The Story of Santiago.”

17 “Annual Report of Brigadier-General Fitzhugh Lee, August 15, 1899,” Annual Reports of the War Department for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1899, Report of the Major-General Commanding the Army (Washington, 1899), Part I, 213.

18 Healy, The United States in Cuba, 108–112.

19 “Annual Report of Fitzhugh Lee, August 15, 1899.”

20 “Special Report of Brigadier-General Fitzhugh Lee, September 19, 1899,” Annual Reports, War Department, 1899, Report of Major-General John R. Brooke on Civil Affairs in Cuba (Washington, 1900), 344.

21 Lee to Daniel S. Lamont, November 29 and December 3, 1898, Lamont Papers; Lee to Thomas L. Rosser, July 28, 1899, Thomas L. Rosser Papers, University of Virginia Library.

22 Lee to Wilson, October 19, December 21 and 30, 1899; Wilson to Theodore Roosevelt, September 11, 1899; and Wilson to Joseph B. Foraker, November 20, 1899, James H. Wilson Papers, Library of Congress.

23 Beginning with the formal transfer of government from Spain to the United States, the Cuban insurgents resented American rule and felt that their past services in fighting the Spanish were ignored. Occupation leaders were fearful that the insurgents might resort to armed attack on American soldiers. See Healy, The United States in Cuba, 53–56. The contribution of the insurgents in defeating the Spanish has been he subject of much scrutiny by revisionist historians in Cuba. In general, the revisionists argue that the rebel army brought Spain to her knees before the American invasion. See Duvon C. Corbitt, “Cuban Revisionist Interpretations of Cuba’s Struggle for Independence,” The Hispanic American Historical Review, XLIII, No. 3 (August, 1963), 395–404. Of course, the revisionist’s view strongly conflicts with Lee’s opinion that a stalemate existed between the Spanish and the insurgents from 1896 to 1898.

24 Millett, The Politics of Intervention, 33–35.

25 The Cuban revisionist historians view Wood as a leading American imperialist who tried to thwart the birth of Cuban independence. In consequence, they have harshly criticized his administration. Until the 1930s, most Cuban historians reserved their criticisms for the Platt Amendment and subsequent American interventions. See Corbitt, “Cuban Revisionist Interpretations,” 395–396.

26 Millett, The Politics of Intervention, 36–44; Healy, The United States in Cuba, 107–178; Lee to James H. Wilson, December 30, 1899, and December 11, 1900, Wilson Papers.

27 F. C. Ainsworth to P. J. McCumber, May 21, 1906, Lee File, A.G.O., RG 94, NA; Lee to James H. Wilson, January 21, February 4 and 13, 1901, Wilson Papers.

28 Lee to Wilson, December 21 and 18, 1901, Wilson Papers.

29 Lee to Wilson, November 13, 1903, ibid.; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Proceedings of the Jefferson Memorial and Interstate Good Roads Convention, 1902 (Washington, 1902), 9–13.

30 Richmond Dispatch, September 21, 1902; Charles R. Keiley (ed), The Official Blue Book of the Jamestown Tercentennial Exposition (Norfolk, Va., 1909), 39, 46.

31 Journal of the House of Delegates, Extra Session, 1901, 55–56.

32 Keily, Blue Book, 39–79; Robert T. Taylor, “The Jamestown Tercentennial Exposition of 1907,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, LXV, No. 2 (April, 1957), 169–208; Lee to Thomas Nelson Page, September 2, 1904, Page Papers; Lee to Edwin A. Alderman, October 17, 1904, Edwin A. Alderman Papers, University of Virginia Library.

33 The quotation is from the Norfolk Virginian-Pilot, April 30, 1905, but see also its editions of April 29–May 6, and the following newspapers (all 1905); New York Times, April 29 and 30; Atlanta Constitution, April 29–May 5; Atlanta Journal, April 29.

Return to General Fitzhugh Lee