Archives - Muriel Wiggins Comments on Martin Luther King, Jr., Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson
January 2002
Letters to the Editor: Muriel Wiggins Comments on Martin Luther King, Jr., Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson
Search for:

Home

Hi George,

I am convinced of the appropriateness of having a separate day to honor Martin Luther King, Jr. whose contributions will resound for generations.

I also feel the two generals should be honored. This may be a good time for all of us to dust off the cobwebs of our historical recollections.

It seems that I recall reading that neither Stonewall Jackson nor Robert E. Lee were supporters of slavery. I can see how Jackson would have felt this way as, again as I may suffer from dusty recollection, he attended West Point and was reminded through the daily treatment he received that he was not from the more "genteel"class of southerners. Through some writers of history that distain was perpetuated. .

We can identify these perspectives in the imbalanced portrayals of the Black and Native American sexperiences. We have little option except to rely on "His"story.

If my memory is not serving me well about my recollections, I am open to hearing from one with more historical accumen. Until then I see no reason to not acknowledge the accomplishments of two good officers who followed code of their profession during a critical milestone in our history.

Muriel Wiggins (electronic mail, January 19, 2002)

Editor's Note: Below you will find one account of Robert E. Lee's opinion regarding slavery.

In the letter, he calls slavery "a moral and political evil":

Robert E. Lee letter dated December 27, 1856 in response to speech given by President Pierce:

"I was much pleased the with President's message. His views of the systematic and progressive efforts of certain people at the North to interfere with and change the domestic institutions of the South are truthfully and faithfully expressed. The consequences of their plans and purposes are also clearly set forth. These people must be aware that their object is both unlawful and foreign to them and to their duty, and that this institution, for which they are irresponsible and non-accountable, can only be changed by them through the agency of a civil and servile war. There are few, I believe, in this enlightened age, who will not acknowledge that slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil. It is idle to expatiate on its disadvantages. I think it is a greater evil to the white than to the colored race. While my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more deeply engaged for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, physically, and socially. The painful discipline they are undergoing is necessary for their further instruction as a race, and will prepare them, I hope, for better things. How long their servitude may be necessary is known and ordered by a merciful Providence. Their emancipation will sooner result from the mild and melting influences of Christianity than from the storm and tempest of fiery controversy. This influence, though slow, is sure. The doctrines and miracles of our Saviour have required nearly two thousand years to convert but a small portion of the human race, and even among Christian nations what gross errors still exist! While we see the course of the final abolition of human slavery is still onward, and give it the aid of our prayers, let us leave the progress as well as the results in the hands of Him who, chooses to work by slow influences, and with whom a thousand years are but as a single day. Although the abolitionist must know this, must know that he has neither the right not the power of operating, except by moral means; that to benefit the slave he must not excite angry feelings in the master; that, although he may not approve the mode by which Providence accomplishes its purpose, the results will be the same; and that the reason he gives for interference in matters he has no concern with, holds good for every kind of interference with our neighbor, -still, I fear he will persevere in his evil course. . . . Is it not strange that the descendants of those Pilgrim Fathers who crossed the Atlantic to preserve their own freedom have always proved the most intolerant of the spiritual liberty of others?"



Comments? Questions? Write me at george@loper.org.