From the 11 October 1899 issue of The New York Times.
LEE'S PORTRAIT AND WEST POINT
To the Editor of The New York Times:
It is to be regretted that the remarks which appeared in your column "Topics of the Times" a few days ago concerning the replacing of the portrait of Gen. Robert E. Lee on the wall of the graduation hall at West Point should have been the occasion of any further "unpleasantness" between North and South.
Yet, now that the too-well-known recrimination has again occurred, it may be pointed out with advantage that the writer of the paragraph in THE TIMES challenged by his lack of tact the dissent of The Charleston News and Courier, a paper, whatever its shortcomings, always fearless in the expression of its convictions. There is no "scornful anger" in its quoted and reprsentative remarks. Rahter does the sarcasm with which these remarks are quoted lessen the sincerity of the original paragraph in THE TIMES.
Until the North learns that the South does not wish extended to her that "forgetfulness" which is "one of the highest forms of magnanimity" and that "remembrance that is one of the highest forms of forgetfulness," and until the North learns, in its efforts to foster a kindlier feeling between the two sections, that it is more graceful and more tactful not to speak of "magnanimity" and "forgetfulness"—until, in short, the North learns and acknowledges that the South does not stand, and has never considered herself to stand, in the position of a subject class to whom magnanimity can be meted, so long is "any Northerner who expects to please The Charleston News and Courier [or the people it represents] extremely likely to be disappointed."
There is but one way in which the restoration of the portrait of Gen. Lee to a place among its fellows at West Point could gratify the self-respecting class at the South, and that would be through the spontaneous action of the authorities of the institution. For the South to ask this as a boon, or even as its just right, is unbecoming. If the National Academy can afford thus to slight the most illustrious example of its teaching in the art of war there is no loss in this to the fame of Lee. And The Charleston News and Courier would agree with the words, though doubtless reading into them a widely different meaning, that whatever else the restoration of the portrait would serve to recall besides Lee's eminent services to the National Academy "might no less make for the edification of patriotic youth."
"Forgiving" and "forgetting" are noble words; but preached from the patronizing side of the sounding board they make an ugly echo.
ROBERT ADGER BOWEN.
New York. Oct. 8, 1899.