This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
We had hoped to add to the above statement of Mr. Halbach that of Rev. Richard Hugh Bagby, D. D., who commanded the Home Guard on the occasion, who was stationed within a few feet of Colonel Dahlgren when he was killed, and who told us (in the course of a very minute and vivid description of the affair) that he heard of the papers soon after they were taken from Dahlgren's body; that he read them the next morning before there was any opportunity for any one to alter them, and that the publications in the Richmond papers were correct copies of the originals. Dr. Bagby wrote out his statement for Hon. A. H. Stephens, and the distinguished Georgian told us not long before his death that he remembered distinctly the statement, and would try to find it among his papers, but he died before sending it and we have not yet been able to recover it. Dr. Bagby also promised to write out his narrative and to procure affidavits as to the authenticity of the Dahlgren papers from others who were present, in response to a request made through us by General R. E. Lee, who said that while he had never had the slightest doubt of the authenticity of the papers, he wished to furnish in his ‘History of the Army of Northern Virginia,’ which he was purposing to write, the most indisputable proofs that the papers were genuine, and not forgeries. But, alas! Dr. Richard Hugh Bagby—one of the truest, bravest, purest, noblest specimens of the Christian gentlemen, and the able minister of the gospel whom we ever knew—died before he had prepared his paper, and General R. E. Lee ‘crossed over the river’ before he had done more than collect the material for a book whose lightest statement the world would have received with implicit credence. But this missing evidence is not a ‘missing link’ in our chain which we will show to be complete and perfect. Mr. Halbach's sworn statement shows beyond all cavil that he delivered the papers to Lieutenant Pollard just as they were taken from Dahlgren's person; that there was no alteration, and that the publication in the Richmond papers was correct.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.