The historical record, as examined here, indisputedly shows
there are important facts which must be considered in weighing the credibility
of General Lee being the person responsible for the writing of the Lost Order.
First, there is the glaring fact that the Lost Order was not written by one of Lee’s staff officers. The record shows that,
during the Sharpsburg Campaign, all of them were enlisted by Lee, at one point
or another, to write orders and letters at his direction: Chilton wrote Lee’s
letter to
Davis
,
dated
September 14, 1862
.
Charles Marshall wrote Lee’s letter to
Davis
,
dated
September 12, 1862
,
which enclosed the official eight
paragraph copy of the order, labeled as Special Order 190. A.P. Mason wrote
Special Order 191, directing Walter Taylor to return to
Virginia
on the 9th and added to
it, in Chilton’s letterbook, the eight paragraph version labeled as S.O. 190.
From
Hagerstown
,
on September 14th, Charles Venable wrote General McLaws, who was
then at
Maryland
Heights
. According to the standard story
of the Lost Order, the document is presumed to have been written for
transmission to General D.H. Hill, in his campground at
Frederick
. If this is true, then it becomes
inexplicable why the document does not match the writings of one of Lee’s staff
officers.
Second, if the document was prepared in the usual and customary
way, it is inexplicible why the paper stock of the Lost Order, with the Platner
& Porter Manufacturing embossed stamp, does not match the paper stock
of the existing letters and orders
written by Lee’s staff during the Sharpsburg Campaign.
Third, it is inexplicable why the historical record is
devoid of any direct statement made by any of Lee’s staff officers, in their
personal writings and speeches, which constitutes an admission by one of them
that he either wrote the Lost Order, or knows who did. The statement by Walter Taylor, in his book, Four Years with General Lee, that Charles Veneble “always said” he
knew (or thought he knew) how the
order was lost, does not add any weight to the scales when the issue is how and
by whom it was written.
Fourth, the fact that a rain storm, lasting at least twelve
hours, passed over Frederick on
September 11, 1862, creates the impossibility that, on September 9th or 10th, the Lost Order could
have been dropped accidently in the field by a negligent courier. Whether in an
envelope or not, the paper stock of the order would have been turned into paste
by the rain. (Unless, of course, the cast of professional story-tellers make
their envelope waterproof). Certainly, as a consequence of exposure to a rain
storm, the Lost Order would not exist in
the condition that it is presently found in the Library of Congress. From this,
the conclusion must reasonably follow that, in fact, the Lost Order was never
in the hands of a courier to lose.
Fifth, an objective analysis of the strategic situation
Lee’s army was in, on Septembr 9th, highlights the fact that, as he approached Frederick after Lee was gone,
George McClellan learned from many sources that Lee seemed clearly to be taking
his army back across the Potomac into Virginia. Faced with the enemy’s retreat, any reasonably intelligent general (and
Mac was certainly that) would naturally have moved the weight of his army
toward Harper’s Ferry; crossing the Potomac at that location the Union general
would have then moved out between the tracks of the Winchester Railroad and the
Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, toward Winchester expecting to encounter Lee’s rear
guard and engage in battle. If McClellan had decided to do this, there was no
possible way Lee’s detached forces could force the surrender of the Ferry’s
garrison. Which meant Lee had no strategic choice at
Frederick
but to retreat to
Virginia
. He certainly could not permit his
army to engage in a general battle with his line of communication with
Winchester
threatened by
the 12,000 troops holding Harper’s Ferry. Therefore, something had to be
devised whereby Lee might cause McClellan to waste enough time getting to
Harper’s Ferry that Stonewall might first capture it. The only logical way to
induce McClellan to waste time was by inducing him to shift the main weight of
his advance away Harper’s Ferry and toward
Hagerstown
. In light of the strategic situation,
then, it is not unreasonable to recognize why Lee might seize on the old device
of a ruse of war.
From Lee’s 1868 letter to D.H. Hill:
From the Lost Order:
Another example from the Lost Order:
From a letter from Lee to Davis, 1863
From Lee’s 1868 letter to D.H. Hill:
From the Lost Order:
Another example from the Lost Order:
Another example from the Lost Order:
From Lee’s letter to D.H. Hill:
From the Lost Order:
From the Lost Order:
From Lee’s letter to D.H. Hill:
From Lee’s letter to D.H. Hill:
From the Lost Order:
From the Lost Order:
From the Lost Order:
From Lee’s letter to D.H. Hill:
From the Lost Order:
From the Lost Order:
From Lee’s letter to D.H. Hill:
From the Lost Order:
From the Lost Order:
From the Lost Order:
From Lee’s letter to Hill:
From Lee’s letter to Hill:
From Lee’s letter to Hill:
The letter “F”
From Lee’s letter to
Hill:
From Lee’s letter to Hill:
From Lee’s letter toHill:
From the Lost Order:
From the Lost Order:
From the Lost Order:
From the Lost Order:
This is a close call. Several factors must be considered in
rendering a verdict. First, the resolution of the images compromise the analysis to some extent, because
the original documents are over 150 years old and precise detail of the ends of
letters can be better seen by examing the original documents. Second, the
person writing the Lost Order was using pencil while General Lee was using a
pen in writing to Hill. Third, General Lee’s writing hand might have been injured
to some extent when the Lost Order was written, while, in writing to Hill, his hand was not injured. Fourth, the
handwriting examples are separated by almost six years of time.
The fact that the question of whether the Lost Order was
written in General Lee’s handwriting, is a close call in itself points to Lee
as the writer; if what the Library of Congress holds, is the actual document
McClellan received, and not a copy, then, of all those who customarily would
write orders at Lee’s headquarters, the writing comes closest to being Lee’s.
And it makes perfect sense, under the circumstances, that Lee would be the
writer.
The document in the possession of the Library of Congress
has the look of a first draft; drawn in pencil, it has several redos: The writer
wrote the number “1” at first, then changed it to a “9” in the date, suggesting
that the Lost Order was actually written on the 10th; The “P” in Potomac is
redone as is the “F” in Ferry; similar corrections are seen with other letters,
and the phrase “of the army” has been crossed out at the end of a sentence in
paragraph VII. It makes no sense to suggest that a writer would make these
errors in copying McClellan’s document.
In fact McClellan neatly wrote out a copy of the Lost Order for his close friend, Mr. Prime, making no such mistakes.
McClellan died in 1885. His wife, Ellen, was the Executrix
of his estate. Ellen left the
United States
almost immediately following McClellan’s death. She never returned. According
to Dr. Sellers of the Library of Congress’s Manuscript Department, The McClellan Papers were deposited with
the Library “in 1911 and 1916. Among these papers can be found an envelope with
writing on it in the hand of McClellan’s close friend, William Prime. The
envelope size is 9” X 5” with its “V” flap missing. An image of it follows: